T.A.Shameer Ali vs State Of Kerala And Others on 29 September, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA.No. 1646 of 2010()



1. T.A.SHAMEER ALI
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SMT.M.A.VAHEEDA BABU

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

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN

 Dated :29/09/2010

 O R D E R
                 C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, &
                     K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.
                  --------------------------------------------
                        W.A. No. 1646 of 2010
                  --------------------------------------------
              Dated this the 29th day of September, 2010

                                JUDGMENT

Ramachandran Nair, J.

Writ Appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned single

Judge declining to interfere with the petitioner’s challenge against

reservation of President’s post of Sreemoolanagaram Grama

Panchayath to members of Scheduled Caste. According to the

appellant, by rotation, President’s post in the Sreemoolanagaram Grama

Panchayath should be de-reserved and should have left for general

category. Petitioner seems to have raised the contention that if

reservation is required for President’s post , it may apply to

Nedumbassery Grama Panchayath or Kunnukara Grama Panchayath

which are neighbouring Panchayaths. The learned single Judge

declined to entertain the challenge for the reason that election is already

notified. However, it is seen that during pendency of the appellant’s

Writ Petition, the very same learned single Judge allowed a batch of

cases vide Annexure B judgment. If appellant’s WPC was taken along

WA 1646/2010 2

with those cases, which were disposed of vide Annexure B judgment

on a special sitting day, the same would have been disposed of along

with those cases on that day. Before us, standing counsel for Election

Commission submitted that appellant’s case will be considered in the

light of Annexure B judgment because WPC was pending as on the

date of disposal of batch cases. Recording the submission of standing

counsel, we dispose of the Writ Appeal with direction to the Election

Commission to immediately decide the appellant’s challenge against

reservation of President’s post to members of Scheduled Caste based on

Annexure B judgment.

Issue photocopy of this judgment to counsel on both sides today

itself.

(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR)
Judge.

(K. SURENDRA MOHAN)
Judge.

WA 1646/2010    3

kk