High Court Kerala High Court

P.K.Ummer vs Kerala State Delimitation … on 11 August, 2010

Kerala High Court
P.K.Ummer vs Kerala State Delimitation … on 11 August, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 23036 of 2010(D)


1. P.K.UMMER, S/O. ABDHU,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. KERALA STATE DELIMITATION COMMISSION,
                       ...       Respondent

2. KERALA STATE ELECTION COMMISSION,

3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR,

4. WANDOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.RAKESH ROSHAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, SC,K.S.E.COMM

The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

 Dated :11/08/2010

 O R D E R
                T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
                ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                  W.P.(C). No.23036/2010-D
                ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
           Dated this the 11th day of August, 2010

                      J U D G M E N T

Herein the petitioner’s objection against the proposals

for delimitation is in respect of Ward Nos.II and III of

the Wandoor Grama Panchayat. Ext.P4 is the copy of the

objection submitted by the petitioner. According to the

petitioner, the natural boundary shown in the draft

proposal, namely, Kuthirapuzha as eastern boundary of Ward

No.II is not correct. It is prayed that the said matter

may be examined by the Commission before finalising the

delimitation of wards.

2. The respondents have filed a statement and at

paragraph No.6 it is mentioned that the discrepancy

projected by the petitioner has been taken up with the

Village Officer, who is also the Enquiry Officer and found

that the Map of the Grama Panchayat was not in consistent

with the narrations in Annexure 5 and 2A and that after

realising the exact position, the Map has been corrected as

Railway line as the Eastern boundary of Ward No.II.

3. It is pointed out by the learned Standing Counsel

for the Commission that hearing on the objections are over

and the objections of the petitioner will also be

W.P.(C). No.23036/2010
-:2:-

considered. It is upto the Commission to consider the

objections in accordance with the guidelines and the writ

petition is accordingly, disposed of. No costs.

(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)
ms