Mohammed Abdul Rahiman.V.P vs State Co-Operative Election … on 28 July, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 21030 of 2009(W)


1. MOHAMMED ABDUL RAHIMAN.V.P,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE CO-OPERATIVE ELECTION COMMISSION,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE RETURNING OFFICER,TIRUR CO-OPERATIVE

3. SRI.P.K.PURUSHOTHAMAN,PART TIME

                For Petitioner  :SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :28/07/2009

 O R D E R
                      ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                    ================
                W.P.(C) NO. 21030 OF 2009 (W)
                =====================

             Dated this the 28th day of July, 2009

                         J U D G M E N T

Petitioner is a candidate in the election to the Board of

Directors of the Tirur Co-operative Agricultural and Rural

Development Bank limited. The election is scheduled to take

place on 1/8/09 and the 2nd respondent is appointed as Returning

Officer for the conduct of election. Petitioner apprehends trouble

during election and in this writ petition, prayer sought is that he

should be directed to vidreograph the polling to be held in

pursuance to Ext.P1 election notification.

2. In view of the apprehension expressed by the

petitioner, there is nothing wrong in permitting the petitioner to

videograph the events of the venue of voting at the cost of the

petitioner himself, and that too under the orders of the 2nd

respondent, the Returning Officer.

3. However, the learned Government Pleader contended

that unlike in Ext.P3 judgment where similar directions were

issued, this Court should not pass orders permitting the petitioner

to obtain copy of videotape/CDs. In my view, if a copy of the

WPC 21030/09
:2 :

videotape/CD is obtained by the petitioner, there cannot be any

prejudice to the respondents.

Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the

petitioner should be permitted to videograph the events of the

venue of the voting, at his expenses, and subject to the directions

of the 2nd respondent. It is further directed that the originals of

the video tape or CDs will be retained by the Returning Officer

and it will be open to the petitioner to obtain a copy of the same.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp