THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
WRIT PETITION No. 649 OF 2023
O R D E R:
This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief: " to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in declaring the petitioners ineligible to participate in the election notification dated 19.12.2022 schedule to be held on 09.01.2023 is illegal, arbitrary, and unjust and contrary to the guidelines prescribed in the election notification and consequently direct the respondents to declare the petitioners as eligible candidates to participate in the election notification dated 19.12.2022 scheduled to be held on 09.01.2023 and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."
2. Learned counsel for petitioners Smt. Jyothi Eswar Gogineni submits that Telangana State Industrial Infrastructure Corporation is formed for the purpose of welfare of industrial estates. It is submitted that the petitioners are members of Nacharam Notified Municipal Industrial Area Service Society. The term of the previous committee expired in 2019 and due to Covid, no election has been conducted. After repeated requests made by the members of the Society, notification was issued on 19.12.2022 to conduct elections to the Managing Committee and election schedule was also given. It is submitted that the 2nd petitioner representing the 1st petitioner filed his nomination 2 on 29.12.2022 for the post of Joint Secretary and the petitioners came to know that their nomination was rejected. On enquiry, they came to know that in view of Clause 21 of the election guidelines, the petitioners' nomination cannot be considered. It is submitted that as per Clause 21, no Managing Committee office bearer or member is allowed to contest if he is absent for more than seven meetings or 35% of the meetings during the three years of the body whichever is higher. It is submitted that the said clause do not apply to the petitioners as there is no body and no meetings were conducted. Therefore, the question of invoking Clause 21 does not arise.
3. Smt. G.Neeraja Reddy, learned counsel representing Sri L. Prabhakar Rao, learned Standing Counsel for TSIIC relying on the judgments of this Court in Prathipati Bhagyamma v. Election Officer, Muppalla Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society, Guntur District1 and Poloji Veeraiah v. Returning Officer, Khammam District2 submits that once election process is commenced by issuing election notification, there is bar to entertain the Writ Petitions and any disputes arising out of it have to be decided by the Election Tribunal as per the jurisdiction conferred in the light of Article 329(b). It is 1 2005(6) ALD 850 2 2009(3) ALD 822 (DB) 3 submitted that whatever be the reason, in view of the law laid down by this Court as well as the Hon'ble Apex Court, petitioners cannot approach this Court by filing the Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.
4. The petitioners have raised several grounds before this Court. As rightly pointed out by the learned Standing Counsel, in view of the bar under Article 329(b) of the Constitution, any disputes arising out of the same shall be tried by the Election Tribunal and this Court cannot entertain the Writ Petition.
5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioners to raise all the issues before the appropriate Election Tribunal. The observations that are made by this Court are only for the purpose of deciding the issue with regard to the maintainability of the Writ Petition and it will not come in the way of the petitioners in the Election Petition, if so filed by the petitioners. No order as to costs.
6. The Miscellaneous Applications, if any shall stand automatically closed.
-----------------------------------
LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J 06th January 2023 ksld 4 5