Kerala High Court
Rajan Rajeev vs The Electoral Officer on 18 June, 2008
Author: Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan
Bench: Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 17816 of 2008(U)
1. RAJAN RAJEEV,(MEMBERSHIP NO. 8347),
... Petitioner
2. JOHN JOSEPH, (MEMBER SHIP NO. 2497),
3. JOY THOMAS (MEMBERSHIP NO. 13410),
Vs
1. THE ELECTORAL OFFICER, THE UDUMPANNOOR
... Respondent
2. THE UDUMPANNOOR C0-OPERATIVE BANK
For Petitioner :SRI.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR
For Respondent :SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
Dated :18/06/2008
O R D E R
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.
==================================
W.P.(C)No.17816 of 2008
==================================
Dated this the 18th day of June 2008.
JUDGMENT
The first petitioner was the President of the second respondent Co-operative Bank. He aspires to contest the election which is to be held on 22- 6-2008. He and other two members of the bank have filed this writ petition alleging that there had been large scale exclusion of members from the list of voters and in spite of the specific complaints, the matter has not been considered. Ext.P2 is stated to be a list issued by the electoral officer enlisting certain persons who appeared before the electoral officer on 04-06-2008 raising objections regarding non-inclusion. According to the petitioners, apart from improper inclusion, all persons enlisted in Ext.P12 have been wrongly included in the final list even without any objections being raised by them as to exclusions. W.P.(C) No.17816/2008 -:2:-
2. The right to be included in the voters list of a Co-operative Society is a statutory right, which accrues in favour of a member of the society who becomes qualified to vote. That right is one which has to be agitated by that person. Therefore, unlike in the case of wrongful inclusion, an objection as to wrong exclusion could, normally, be raised only by the persons excluded. May be that in exceptionally exceptional circumstances where the entire provisions of the Act and Rules are thrown to the winds and there is gross violation of the basic principles of justice and Rule of Law. The competent authorities, including the courts, may step in at the instance of one or more of the other members. But the case in hand does not inspire confidence for exercising the writ jurisdiction in favour of the petitioners though they may have legitimate right to raise all such contentions in an election dispute, if become necessary.
W.P.(C) No.17816/2008 -:3:-
3. Having regard to the nature of the grounds raised, I do not deem it appropriate to issue a direction in this writ petition as sought for by the petitioners, while none of the contentions of the petitioners are also concluded by this judgment, prejudicing them in any election dispute.
In the result, this writ petition is dismissed preserving all the rights of the petitioners as stated above.
Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, Judge.
skr/18-6-08