Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

V.Vimala Vs. the Returning Officer

V.Vimala vs The Returning Officer

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Nov 06, 2013
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1097437

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Election

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Election

Key legal issue
Election

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

V.Vimala

Respondent

The Returning Officer

Excerpt

.....this the 6th day of november, 2013 judgment the petitioner was a candidate in the election to the 2nd respondent co-operative society, wherein the 1st respondent was a returning officer. the only grievance of the petitioner is that though she had secured 22 votes in the initial counting, on re-counting her votes were said to be only 19 and she was not elected. the contention is that ext.r1(a) produced by the returning officer would make it clear that the re-counting was done only in the presence of those persons who had secured more votes that 20. the petitioner demands that a further re-counting of the votes may be carried out. the election itself was conducted on 26.7.2013 and the results were declared on the same day. the petitioner has not chosen to approach the appropriate authority to challenge the election and the results declared. the petitioner seeks invocation of article 226 of the constitution. this court is of the opinion that on the facts and circumstances of the case the prayer has to be declined for the reason of the petitioner not wpc.21303/2013 :2. : availing the alternate remedy of filing an election petition. the writ petition hence stands dismissed, without prejudice. no costs. sd/- (k. vinod chandran, judge) jma //true copy// p.a to judge

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE6H DAY OF NOVEMBER201315TH KARTHIKA, 1935 WP(C).No. 21303 of 2013 (K) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- V.VIMALA, THOTTUMKARAMELA PUTHEN VEEDU, NARUVAMOODU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS.SRI.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR SMT.V.BEENA RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE RETURNING OFFICER (ELECTION TO THE THEMPAMUTTAM HANDLOOM WEAVERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD NO.T-339, THEMPAMUTTAM, BALARAMAPURAM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM) (SENIOR CO-OPERATIVE INSPECTOR SPECIAL GRADE , HANDLOOM CIRCLE, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.

2. THEMPAMUTTAM HANDLOOM WEAVERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD NO.T-339,THEMPAMUTTAM, BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY-695 501.

3. C.RAJAN, MEMBER MANAGING COMMITTEE OF THEMPAMUTTAM HANDLOOM WEAVERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD NO.T-339 , THEMPAMUTTAM, BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695501.

4. C.RAMAN, MEMBER MANAGING COMMITTEE OF THEMPAMUTTAM HANDLOOM WEAVERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD NO.T-339 THEMPAMUTTAM, BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695501.

5. S.PRASANNAKUMARI, MEMBER MANAGING COMMITTEE OF THEMPAMUTTAM HANDLOOM WEAVERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD NO.T-339 THEMPAMUTTAM, BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695501. tss WP(C).No. 21303 of 2013 6. S.R.USHAKUMARI, MEMBER MANAGING COMMITTEE OF THEMPAMUTTAM HANDLOOM WEAVERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD NO.T-339 THEMPAMUTTAM, BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695501. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.PADMARAJ R3 BY ADV. SRI.T.M.RAMAN KARTHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON0611-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss WP(C).No. 21303 of 2013 (K) -------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1.TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED226/2013 ISSUED BY THE1T RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2.TRUE COPY OF THE ONE OF THE MODEL BALLOT PAPER OF THE ELECTION TO THE2D RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3.TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE1T RESPONDENT DATED NIL. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C) No.21303 of 2013 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 6th day of November, 2013

JUDGMENT

The petitioner was a candidate in the election to the 2nd respondent Co-operative Society, wherein the 1st respondent was a returning officer. The only grievance of the petitioner is that though she had secured 22 votes in the initial counting, on re-counting her votes were said to be only 19 and she was not elected. The contention is that Ext.R1(a) produced by the returning officer would make it clear that the re-counting was done only in the presence of those persons who had secured more votes that 20. The petitioner demands that a further re-counting of the votes may be carried out. The election itself was conducted on 26.7.2013 and the results were declared on the same day. The petitioner has not chosen to approach the appropriate authority to challenge the election and the results declared. The petitioner seeks invocation of Article 226 of the Constitution. This Court is of the opinion that on the facts and circumstances of the case the prayer has to be declined for the reason of the petitioner not WPC.21303/2013 :

2. : availing the alternate remedy of filing an election petition. The writ petition hence stands dismissed, without prejudice. No costs. Sd/- (K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A To Judge

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial