{"id":31464,"date":"2009-08-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-08-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009"},"modified":"2018-10-23T21:27:30","modified_gmt":"2018-10-23T15:57:30","slug":"k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009","title":{"rendered":"K.E.Pareedkunju vs The Electoral Officer\/Assistant on 6 August, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
K.E.Pareedkunju vs The Electoral Officer\/Assistant on 6 August, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 20900 of 2009(F)\n\n\n1. K.E.PAREEDKUNJU, MEMBER NO. 16431,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE ELECTORAL OFFICER\/ASSISTANT\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE RETURNING OFFICER\/INSPECTOR OF\n\n3. CHERTHALA CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL\n\n4. SMT.ANANDAVALLY AMMA,\n\n5. SHRI.A.N.SUGUNAN,\n\n6. SHRI.S.BAHULEYAN,\n\n7. SHRI.P.S.GOPI, MEMBERSHIP NO. 10715,\n\n8. SHRI.T.R.HARIDAS, MEMBERSHIP NO.11671,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.JAJU BABU\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC\n\n Dated :06\/08\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                       ANTONY DOMINIC, J.\n                  -------------------------\n     W.P.(C.) Nos.20900, 21577, 21605 & 22122 of 2009\n   ------------------------------------------------\n             Dated, this the 6th day of August, 2009\n\n                          J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
     The legality of the final voters list of the members of the<\/p>\n
Cherthala Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank<\/p>\n
(hereinafter referred to as the Bank for short) is the issue that is<\/p>\n
raised in WP(C) Nos.20900, 21577 & 21605 of 2009.<\/p>\n
     2.     The issue being common, these three writ petitions are<\/p>\n
heard together, and are disposed of by this common judgment. For<\/p>\n
convenience, I shall be referring to the facts and documents as are<\/p>\n
available in WP(C) No.20900\/2009.\n<\/p>\n
     3.     The petitioner in this writ petition is presently a member<\/p>\n
of the Board of Directors of the Bank. By Ext.P4, election to the<\/p>\n
Board of Directors of the Bank has been notified and is scheduled to<\/p>\n
be held on 09\/08\/2009.           In compliance with the schedule<\/p>\n
prescribed in Ext.P4, along with Ext.P5 notice, preliminary voters list<\/p>\n
was published by the Electoral Officer on 15\/07\/2009. It is stated<\/p>\n
that thereupon respondents 4 to 8 raised objections and the<\/p>\n
WP(C) Nos.20900, 21577, 21605, 22122\/2009<\/p>\n
                                      -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
Electoral Officer verified the records of the Bank. It is the case of<\/p>\n
the Bank, which is also a petitioner in WP(C) No.21605\/2009, that<\/p>\n
such verification was behind their back and was without notice to<\/p>\n
them. Be that as it may, by Ext.P7 order dated 22\/07\/2009, the<\/p>\n
Electoral Officer held that several members included in the list are<\/p>\n
expired and that their inclusion in the list is irregular and that their<\/p>\n
names should be removed. It is also held that membership granted<\/p>\n
to members at serial Nos.9365 to 12725 and 12753 to 14306 were<\/p>\n
not incompliance with the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative<\/p>\n
Societies Act and the Rules framed thereunder and also against the<\/p>\n
bye-laws of the Society, and therefore, removing those members<\/p>\n
also, a final voters list should be prepared and made available to the<\/p>\n
Electoral Officer before 11 am on 23\/07\/2009.\n<\/p>\n
      4.    The Bank submits that they received Ext.P7 at 4 p.m. on<\/p>\n
22\/07\/2009, and despite the paucity of time, they submitted a list<\/p>\n
as desired by the Electoral Officer.       They also submitted a list<\/p>\n
excluding those members, who were indicated in the preliminary<\/p>\n
voters list as expired. On 23\/07\/2009 itself, the Bank submitted<\/p>\n
Ext.P8 to the Electoral Officer reiterating the eligibility of the<\/p>\n
WP(C) Nos.20900, 21577, 21605, 22122\/2009<\/p>\n
                                      -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
aforesaid 4915 persons to be retained in the voters list. Irrespective<\/p>\n
of the objections filed, Ext.P6 final voters list was published by the<\/p>\n
Electoral Officer on 23\/07\/2009.         In the list, the names of the<\/p>\n
expired 145 persons and also names of the allegedly ineligible 4915<\/p>\n
persons were excluded. It is thereupon that these writ petitions<\/p>\n
were filed, praying that the removal of 4915 members in the final<\/p>\n
voters list of the Bank is illegal and to quash the said action of the<\/p>\n
Electoral Officer.   Further prayer is to direct that the aforesaid<\/p>\n
members should be permitted to cast their votes, and that the<\/p>\n
petitioner in WP(C) No.20900\/2009 should be permitted to contest<\/p>\n
in the election.    In this context, it is also to be mentioned that<\/p>\n
pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court on 27\/07\/2009,<\/p>\n
the petitioner in WP(C) No.20900\/2009 has already submitted his<\/p>\n
nomination and the same has been scrutinised and accepted<\/p>\n
provisionally.\n<\/p>\n
      5.    The learned Government Pleader argued the case with<\/p>\n
reference to the documents that he obtained from the Electoral<\/p>\n
Officer, and was duly supported by the counsel appearing for the<\/p>\n
party respondents at whose instance, the elimination process was<\/p>\n
WP(C) Nos.20900, 21577, 21605, 22122\/2009<\/p>\n
                                      -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
initiated.  According to the learned Government Pleader, on the<\/p>\n
publication of Ext.P5 preliminary voters list, complaints were<\/p>\n
received from respondents 4 to 8 mentioned above, and the<\/p>\n
Secretary was called upon to produce the minutes of the Bank<\/p>\n
admitting members to the Society with effect from 2000. It is stated<\/p>\n
that accordingly the copies of the minutes were received and on<\/p>\n
verification, it was found that for various reasons the admission of<\/p>\n
4915 persons was irregular.             It is also submitted that the<\/p>\n
preliminary voters list contained a list of 145 persons, who<\/p>\n
admittedly had expired.        It is stated that thereupon, Ext.P7 was<\/p>\n
issued, and accordingly, the final voters list excluding ineligible<\/p>\n
persons were published. It is contended that the aforesaid actions<\/p>\n
of the Electoral Officer are perfectly in compliance with the<\/p>\n
provisions contained in Rule 35A of the Kerala Co-operative<\/p>\n
Societies Rules.\n<\/p>\n
      6.    Conduct of the election to the Bank is regulated by the<\/p>\n
provisions contained in Rule 35A of the KCS Rules and it is the<\/p>\n
responsibility of the Electoral Officer to publish final voters list after<\/p>\n
considering the objections filed against the preliminary voters list.<\/p>\n
WP(C) Nos.20900, 21577, 21605, 22122\/2009<\/p>\n
                                       -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
Power of the Electoral Officer to remove the ineligible persons from<\/p>\n
the preliminary voters list, has been recognized by this Court in the<\/p>\n
judgment in Vijayakumar v. Joint Registrar<\/a> (1996(1) KLT 285). In<\/p>\n
the aforesaid judgment, paragraphs 16 to 19, to the extent it is<\/p>\n
relevant, reads as under:-\n<\/p>\n
     “16.    ——— .     It has therefore, to be taken that the
\n     Returning Officer has the power to conduct a summary enquiry
\n     when objection is raised regarding the inclusion of a member in
\n     the voters list. The powers to consider the objections has been
\n     conferred on the Returning Officer alone. There is nothing in
\n     the Act or Rules to show that he can delegate or abdicate his
\n     functions in favour of any authority of the Society.            The
\n     returning officer is required to give his own ruling on the
\n     objection.    He cannot rule out any objection or sustain it
\n     arbitrarily. In order to arrive at a proper decision it is open to
\n     him to conduct a summary enquiry to be satisfied about the
\n     sustainability or otherwise of the objections. But, he can do so
\n     only if the objections are specific and definite against each
\n     individual member which can be subjected to verification with
\n     reliable materials that may be made available to him by the
\n     objections and the authorities of the Society.          He is not
\n     expected to make a roving enquiry.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            17.    It is he who is to be satisfied about the correctness
\n     or otherwise of the objections. He cannot simply forward the
\n     objections to the authorities of the society for their verification.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     If, however, the objections are general or vague in nature or
\n     appear to be prima facie baseless, the Returning Officer is not<\/p>\n
WP(C) Nos.20900, 21577, 21605, 22122\/2009<\/p>\n
                                       -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
     bound to make any enquiry. We are therefore, unable to agree
\n     wholly with the proposition laid down in Mathew’s case and
\n     Kottappady Service Co-op. Bank’s case on this aspect.            We
\n     approve the observation made by the learned single Judge in
\n     Alleppey Dist. Co-op. D.S.Co-op. Society Ltd.’s Case to the
\n     extent that the Returning Officer has a duty to make an enquiry
\n     into the objections to ascertain the eligibility of a member to
\n     vote in an election who is listed in the draft voters list furnished
\n     by the Society. But, we do not agree with his observations that
\n     the Returning Officer should sent the objections along with the
\n     draft voters list to the committee of the Society to prepare the
\n     final list. That would amount to surrender of his functions in
\n     favour of the Society, which is not contemplated in R.35 of the
\n     Rules.\n<\/p>\n
             18.  In the case at hand, it appears that the objections
\n     in Ext.P3 are very general in nature. No specific and definite
\n     allegations have been made against individual members listed
\n     in the voters list. The Returning Officer is therefore not bound
\n     to make an enquiry into such vague objections.\n<\/p>\n
             19.  For the reasons stated above, we hold that the
\n     Returning Officer has the power to make an enquiry into the
\n     objections if the same are definite and specific and he should
\n     verify them with the materials placed before him by the
\n     objectors and the authorities of the Society. In these cases, the
\n     objections being vague in nature, there is no scope to hold an
\n     enquiry.”\n<\/p>\n
     7.      A reading of the above judgment shows that though the<\/p>\n
Electoral Officer has power to exclude from the voters list persons<\/p>\n
WP(C) Nos.20900, 21577, 21605, 22122\/2009<\/p>\n
                                      -7-<\/span><\/p>\n
who are ineligible to cast their votes in the election, such exclusion<\/p>\n
can be ordered only if objections have been received challenging the<\/p>\n
eligibility of the persons, and that those complaints are specific,<\/p>\n
definite and against each individual member of the Society. It is<\/p>\n
also held that in the process, the enquiry to be held is a summary<\/p>\n
one, and that he is not expected to conduct a roving enquiry.<\/p>\n
      8.    Viewed in the light of the law as laid down in the<\/p>\n
aforesaid judgment, the question to be examined is whether the<\/p>\n
complaints made by respondents 4 to 8 are specific and definite<\/p>\n
against each of the allegedly ineligible individual members, who are<\/p>\n
now removed by the Electoral Officer.       The learned Government<\/p>\n
Pleader has made available the originals of the complaints that were<\/p>\n
received from respondents 4 to 8, and I have gone through each of<\/p>\n
these complaints.      A reading of these complaints show that the<\/p>\n
allegations therein are in very general and vague terms and no<\/p>\n
specific allegation is made with reference to any of the individual<\/p>\n
members, whose eligibility is challenged.       In fact, even in the<\/p>\n
complaint made by the 7th respondent, all that he says is that<\/p>\n
several members included in the list are ineligible and has stated<\/p>\n
WP(C) Nos.20900, 21577, 21605, 22122\/2009<\/p>\n
                                      -8-<\/span><\/p>\n
that some of the ineligible are those at Sl.Nos.17789 to 17869,<\/p>\n
14896 to 14954 and 18421 to 18447. Rest of the complaints are<\/p>\n
more general and vague.           Therefore, it is on the basis of the<\/p>\n
aforesaid complaints that the process of elimination has been<\/p>\n
initiated by the Electoral Officer.\n<\/p>\n
      9.    What is primarily challenged is Ext.P7 of the Electoral<\/p>\n
Officer and as held by the Apex Court in Mohinder Singh Gill and<\/p>\n
another v. The Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi and others<\/p>\n
(AIR 1978 SC 851) when a statutory functionary makes an order<\/p>\n
based on certain grounds, its validity must be judged by the reasons<\/p>\n
mentioned therein and cannot be supplemented by fresh reasons in<\/p>\n
the shape of affidavit or otherwise.\n<\/p>\n
      10.   From Ext.P7 order passed by the Electoral Officer, it can<\/p>\n
be seen that he has generally concluded that the admission of the<\/p>\n
members who are ordered to be excluded, was contrary to the bye-<\/p>\n
laws of the Society and the provisions of the Act and the Rules. The<\/p>\n
findings in the order and the allegations in the complaints received<\/p>\n
are too general and vague and not specific and definite, which are<\/p>\n
the conditions necessary for the Electoral Officer to exercise his<\/p>\n
WP(C) Nos.20900, 21577, 21605, 22122\/2009<\/p>\n
                                      -9-<\/span><\/p>\n
power as held by the Division Bench in the aforesaid judgment. If<\/p>\n
that be so, the removal of 4915 members mentioned in Ext.P7 order<\/p>\n
dated 22\/07\/2009 referred to above has to be held illegal and I do<\/p>\n
so.   Accordingly, I quash Ext.P7 order to the extent it orders<\/p>\n
removal of 4915 members from the final voters list and direct that<\/p>\n
those members also be permitted to cast their votes in the election<\/p>\n
that is scheduled to be held on 09\/08\/2009.\n<\/p>\n
      11.  However, having regard to the fact that the eligibility of<\/p>\n
the aforesaid 4915 persons is disputed by respondents 4 to 8, and<\/p>\n
as this judgment is rendered on the facts stated above, it is<\/p>\n
always open to respondents 4 to 8 to pursue statutory remedies and<\/p>\n
prove their case by adducing evidence. Therefore, it is directed that<\/p>\n
votes of the aforesaid 4915 members be received in separate ballot<\/p>\n
boxes and shall be counted separately. However, it is clarified that<\/p>\n
these votes shall also be reckoned for declaring the results of the<\/p>\n
poll.\n<\/p>\n
      12.  In so far as WP(C) No.22122\/2009 is concerned, the<\/p>\n
prayer sought is to direct respondents 1 to 2 therein to permit the<\/p>\n
petitioner therein to take videograph of the voting at the polling<\/p>\n
WP(C) Nos.20900, 21577, 21605, 22122\/2009<\/p>\n
                                     -10-<\/span><\/p>\n
stations in the election to be held on 09\/08\/2009, and also to<\/p>\n
ensure the identity of the voters, who come for voting at the polling<\/p>\n
stations.   This relief is sought on the basis that the petitioner<\/p>\n
apprehends trouble at the polling stations and also bogus voting.<\/p>\n
      13.   In several cases of this nature, considering identical<\/p>\n
apprehensions, this Court has granted these reliefs. Therefore, in<\/p>\n
this writ petition also, the Returning Officer is directed to allow<\/p>\n
videography of the events at the polling stations, at the cost of the<\/p>\n
petitioner, and retain the original video\/CD with him, and to give a<\/p>\n
copy thereof to the petitioner. This obviously shall be under the<\/p>\n
directions of the Returning Officer.\n<\/p>\n
      14.   It is also directed that if identity of any member is<\/p>\n
disputed, the Returning Officer should verify the identity of the<\/p>\n
person concerned with reference to the photograph in the ID and<\/p>\n
the photograph in Form 6B Register.\n<\/p>\n
      These writ petitions are disposed of as above.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                          (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
\njg<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court K.E.Pareedkunju vs The Electoral Officer\/Assistant on 6 August, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 20900 of 2009(F) 1. K.E.PAREEDKUNJU, MEMBER NO. 16431, … Petitioner Vs 1. THE ELECTORAL OFFICER\/ASSISTANT … Respondent 2. THE RETURNING OFFICER\/INSPECTOR OF 3. CHERTHALA CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL 4. SMT.ANANDAVALLY AMMA, 5. SHRI.A.N.SUGUNAN, 6. SHRI.S.BAHULEYAN, 7. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-31464","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nK.E.Pareedkunju vs The Electoral Officer\/Assistant on 6 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"K.E.Pareedkunju vs The Electoral Officer\/Assistant on 6 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-08-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-10-23T15:57:30+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"K.E.Pareedkunju vs The Electoral Officer\\\/Assistant on 6 August, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-23T15:57:30+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009\"},\"wordCount\":2116,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009\",\"name\":\"K.E.Pareedkunju vs The Electoral Officer\\\/Assistant on 6 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-23T15:57:30+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"K.E.Pareedkunju vs The Electoral Officer\\\/Assistant on 6 August, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"K.E.Pareedkunju vs The Electoral Officer\/Assistant on 6 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"K.E.Pareedkunju vs The Electoral Officer\/Assistant on 6 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-08-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-10-23T15:57:30+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"K.E.Pareedkunju vs The Electoral Officer\/Assistant on 6 August, 2009","datePublished":"2009-08-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-23T15:57:30+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009"},"wordCount":2116,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009","name":"K.E.Pareedkunju vs The Electoral Officer\/Assistant on 6 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-08-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-23T15:57:30+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-e-pareedkunju-vs-the-electoral-officerassistant-on-6-august-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"K.E.Pareedkunju vs The Electoral Officer\/Assistant on 6 August, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31464","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=31464"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31464\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=31464"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=31464"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=31464"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}