Ahmed Kutty T.P vs State Of Kerala
2025 Latest Caselaw 1830 Ker

Kerala High Court

Ahmed Kutty T.P vs State Of Kerala on 1 August, 2025

​W.ANo.1748 of 2025             1​             2025:KER:56866​
                                               ​




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM​
            ​

                             PRESENT​
                             ​

  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI​
  ​

                                 &​
                                 ​

           THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SYAM KUMAR V.M.​
           ​

               ST​
               ​
  FRIDAY, THE 1​
  ​                DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 10TH SRAVANA,​​
                   ​                                  1947​

                        WA NO. 1748 OF 2025​
                        ​

        AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 10.07.2025 IN WP(C) NO.24889​
        ​

                  OF 2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA​
                  ​

APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS IN WP(C):​
​

      1​
      ​       ​HMED KUTTY T.P,​
              A
              AGED 48 YEARS​
              ​
              S/O BEERAN T.P, RESIDING AT ‘IDAM' TONIDKO​
              ​
              PAINAT, VALLIKKUNNU P.O., MALAPPURAM, PIN - 673314​
              ​

      2​
      ​       ​ RAJAN​
              K
              AGED 68 YEARS​
              ​
              S/O AYYAPPAN RESIDING AT KOZHIKKATTIL (H),​
              ​
              KODAKKAD (P.O) MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676319​
              ​

              ​Y ADVS.​
              B
              SHRI.ANOOP V.NAIR​
              ​
              SHRI.ATHUL P.​
              ​
              SRI.YASHWANTH SHENOY​
              ​


RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN W.P(C):​

​

1​ ​ ​TATE OF KERALA​ S STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY,​ ​ ​W.ANo.1748 of 2025 2​ 2025:KER:56866​ ​

​OVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,​ G PIN - 695001​ ​

2​ ​ ​HE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,​ T LOCAL SELF GOVT. DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,​ ​ THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001​ ​

3​ ​ ​HE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION,​ T REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE​ ​ STATE ELECTION COMMISSION, CORPORATION OFFICE​ ​ COMPLEX, LMS JUNCTION, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,​ ​ PIN - 695033​ ​

4​ ​ ​HE STATE DELIMITATION COMMISSION​ T OFFICE OF THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION,​ ​ CORPORATION OFFICE COMPLEX, LMS JUNCTION, PALAYAM,​ ​ THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN,​ ​ PIN - 695033​ ​

5​ ​ ​HE DISTRICT ELECTION OFFICER (DEPUTY COLLECTOR)​ T COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676505​ ​

6​ ​ ​HE VALLIKKUNNU GRAMA PANCHAYAT,​ T ATHANIKKAL ROAD, MALAPPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS​ ​ SECRETARY, PIN - 673314​ ​

7​ ​ ​EGISTRAR GENERAL AND CENSUS COMMISSIONER​ R GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NDCC​ ​ BUILDING -II, JAISINGH ROAD, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001​ ​

​Y ADVS.​ B SHRI.DEEPU LAL MOHAN, SC, STATE ELECTION​ ​ COMMISSION, KERALA​ ​ SHRI.DEEPU LAL MOHAN, SC, STATE DELIMITATION​ ​ COMMISSION​ ​ O.M.SHALINA, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA​ ​ SRI.SUNIL KUMAR KURIAKOSE - GP​ ​ SMT.O.M.SHALINA - DSGI​ ​

​HIS​ ​ T WRIT​ ​ APPEAL​ ​ HAVING​ ​ BEEN​ ​ COME​ ​ UP​ ​ FOR​ ​ HEARING​ ​ ON​ 29.07.2025,​ ​ ​ THE​ ​COURT​ ​ ON​ ​01.08.2025​ ​DELIVERED​ ​THE​ FOLLOWING:​ ​ ​W.ANo.1748 of 2025 3​ 2025:KER:56866​ ​

​JUDGMENT​

​Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, J.​

​This​ ​intra-court​ ​appeal​ ​under​ ​Section​ ​5​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Kerala​ ​High​ ​Court​

​Act,​ ​1958,​ ​assails​ ​the​ ​interim​ ​order​ ​dated​ ​10.07.2025​ ​passed​ ​in​

​W.P(C)No.24889 of 2025.​

​2.​ ​The​ ​appellants​ ​had​ ​filed​ ​the​ ​writ​ ​petition​ ​seeking​ ​the​ ​following​

​reliefs:​

"​ 1)​​To​​issue​​a​​writ​​of​​certiorari​​calling​​for​​the​​records​​leading​​to​​Exhibit​ ​P4​ ​and​ ​P4​ ​series​ ​of​ ​Exhibits​ ​to​ ​the​ ​extent​ ​they​ ​are​ ​violating​ ​the​ ​statutory​​obligations​​as​​per​​the​​directions,​​regulations​​and​​guidelines​​in​ ​Exhibit​ ​P2​ ​and​ ​set​ ​aside​ ​Exhibits​ ​P4​ ​and​ ​P4​ ​series​ ​of​ ​Exhibits​ ​and​ ​declare​ ​that​ ​the​ ​said​ ​violations​​done​​by​​the​​4th​​respondent​​are​​illegal​ ​and unconstitutional.​ ​(ii)​ ​To​ ​issue​ ​a​ ​writ​ ​of​ ​certiorari​ ​calling​ ​for​ ​the​ ​records​ ​leading​ ​to​ ​the​ ​assessment​​register​​in​​respect​​of​​the​​6th​​respondent​​Panchayat​​to​​the​ ​extent​ ​it​ ​consists​ ​mistakes​ ​and​ ​discrepancies​ ​and​ ​set​ ​aside​ ​the​ ​document.​ ​(iii)​ ​To​ ​issue​ ​a​ ​writ​ ​of​ ​Mandamus,​ ​order​ ​or​ ​direction,​ ​directing​ ​the​ ​respondents​​1​​to​​6​​to​​consider​​the​​factual​​contentions​​of​​the​​petitioners​ ​given​ ​in​ ​objections​ ​and​ ​redivide​ ​the​ ​wards​ ​of​ ​the​ ​6th​ ​respondent​ ​Panchayat​ ​by​ ​strictly​ ​complying​ ​with​ ​the​ ​directions​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Exhibit​ ​P2​ ​guidelines​ ​and​ ​according​ ​to​ ​the​ ​observations​ ​in​ ​Para​ ​6​ ​and​ ​7​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Judgment Exhibit P5.​ ​(iv)​​To​​appoint​​a​​Judicial​​commission​​comprising​​of​​1​​retired​​High​​court​ ​Judges​​or​​retired​​Judicial​​Officers​​to​​assess​​the​​process​​of​​delimitation​ ​process​ ​in​ ​respect​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Panchayat,​ ​considering​ ​the​ ​statutes,​ ​guidelines​ ​and​ ​accuracy​​of​​assessment​​register,​​and​​prepare​​a​​report​ ​to​ ​submit​ ​to​ ​this​ ​Hon'ble​ ​Court​ ​for​ ​further​ ​actions​ ​and​ ​direct​ ​the​ ​respondents​ ​1​ ​to​ ​6,​ ​not​ ​to​ ​implement​ ​the​ ​delimitation​ ​process​ ​being​ ​conducted​ ​now​​based​​on​​Exhibit​​P4​​and​​not​​to​​proceed​​further​​till​​the​ ​submission of the said report.​ ​(v)​ ​To​ ​issue​ ​a​ ​writ​ ​of​ ​Mandamus​ ​order​ ​or​ ​direction​ ​directing​ ​the​ ​respondents​ ​1​ ​to​ ​6​ ​to​ ​number​ ​the​ ​unnumbered​ ​buildings​ ​in​ ​the​ ​6th​ ​respondent​​Panchayat​​and​​exclude​​non-residential​​buildings​​which​​are​ ​estimated​ ​twice​ ​in​ ​a​ ​way​ ​of​ ​duplication,​ ​from​ ​the​ ​list​ ​of​ ​residential​ ​buildings​ ​counted​ ​already​ ​and​ ​include​ ​the​ ​U/A​ ​houses​ ​and​ ​residents​ ​also​ ​duly​ ​comply​ ​with​ ​the​ ​observations​ ​in​ ​Para​ ​6​ ​and​ ​7​ ​of​ ​the​ ​W.ANo.1748 of 2025 4​ 2025:KER:56866​ ​

​ udgment​ ​in​ ​Exhibit​ ​P5​ ​in​ ​the​ ​voters​ ​list​ ​prepared​ ​now​ ​and​ ​to​ J ​implement it in the entire state.​ ​(vi)​ ​To​ ​issue​ ​a​ ​writ​ ​of​ ​Mandamus​ ​order​ ​or​ ​direction​ ​directing​ ​the​ ​respondents​ ​1​ ​to​ ​4,​ ​not​​to​​proceed​​with​​the​​publishing​​of​​fresh​​voters​ ​list​​in​​the​​6th​​respondent​​Panchayat​​based​​on​​the​​present​​delimitation​ ​notification​​produced​​as​​Exhibit​​P4​​and​​P4​​series​​and​​direct​​to​​publish​ ​the​ ​voters​ ​list​ ​only​ ​after​ ​conducting​ ​a​ ​proper​ ​delimitation​ ​process​ ​according​​to​​the​​Act​​and​​Rules​​and​​according​​to​​the​​guidelines​​issued​ ​by​​the​​Delimitation​​Commission​​in​​the​​matter,​​based​​on​​Exhibit​​P2​​and​ ​based on the observations in Para 6 and 7 in the Exhibit P5 judgment.​ ​(vii)​ ​To​ ​issue​ ​a​ ​writ​ ​of​ ​mandamus​ ​order​ ​or​ ​direction​ ​directing​ ​the​ ​6th​ ​respondent​ ​to​ ​produce​ ​the​ ​assessment​ ​register​ ​and​ ​make​​necessary​ ​corrections and update in it after proper ground work.​ ​(viii)​ ​To​ ​issue​ ​such​​other​​writ​​order​​or​​direction​​which​​this​​Honourable​ ​Court deems fit to grant to the facts and circumstances of the case.​

​INTERIM RELIEF​

​ or​​the​​reasons​​stated​​in​​the​​writ​​petition​​filed​​herewith​​it​​is​​prayed​​that​ F ​this​​Hon'ble​​Court​​may​​be​​pleased​​to​​issue​​a​​writ​​of​​Mandamus​​order​ ​or​ ​direction​ ​directing​ ​the​ ​respondents​ ​1​ ​to​ ​4​ ​not​ ​to​ ​proceed​ ​with​ ​the​ ​publishing​ ​of​ ​fresh​ ​voters​ ​list​ ​in​ ​the​ ​6th​​respondent​​Panchayat​​based​ ​on​​the​​present​​delimitation​​notification​​produced​​as​​Exhibit​​P4​​and​​P4​ ​series​ ​and​ ​direct​ ​to​ ​publish​ ​the​ ​voters​ ​list​ ​only​ ​after​ ​conducting​ ​a​ ​proper​ ​delimitation​ ​process​ ​according​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Act​ ​and​ ​Rules​ ​and​ ​according​ ​to​ ​the​ ​guidelines​ ​issued​ ​by​ ​the​​Delimitation​​Commission​​in​ ​the​​matter,​​based​​on​​Exhibit​​P2​​and​​based​​on​​the​​observations​​in​​Para​ ​6 and 7 in the Exhibit P5 judgment."​

​3.​ ​The​ ​learned​ ​counsel​ ​for​ ​the​ ​appellants​ ​submitted​ ​that​ ​the​

​learned​​Single​​Judge​​vide​​the​​impugned​​order,​​admitted​​the​​writ​​petition,​

​but​ ​declined​ ​to​ ​grant​ ​the​ ​interim​ ​relief​ ​as​ ​prayed​ ​for​​in​​the​​writ​​petition.​

​However,​ ​the​ ​learned​ ​Single​ ​Judge​ ​made​ ​it​ ​clear​ ​that​ ​the​ ​final​

​delimitation​ ​notification​ ​would​ ​be​ ​subject​ ​to​ ​the​ ​outcome​ ​of​ ​the​ ​writ​

​petition.​ ​The​ ​learned​ ​counsel​ ​for​ ​the​ ​appellants​ ​further​ ​contended​ ​that​

​the​​learned​​Single​​Judge​​refused​​to​​allow​​the​​interim​​relief​​as​​prayed​​for​ ​W.ANo.1748 of 2025 5​ 2025:KER:56866​ ​

​in​ ​the​ ​writ​ ​petition​ ​where​ ​the​ ​appellants​ ​had​ ​sought​ ​a​ ​direction​ ​to​

​respondents​​1​​to​​4​ ​not​​to​​proceed​​with​​the​​publishing​​of​​fresh​​voters​​list​

​in​ ​the​ ​6th​ ​respondent​ ​Panchayat​ ​based​ ​on​ ​the​ ​present​ ​delimitation​

​notification​ ​and​ ​direct​ ​to​ ​publish​ ​the​ ​voters​ ​list​ ​only​ ​after​ ​conducting​ ​a​

​proper​ ​delimitation​ ​process​ ​according​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Act​ ​and​ ​Rules​ ​and​

​therefore,​ ​if​ ​the​ ​interim​ ​relief​ ​is​ ​not​ ​granted,​ ​it​ ​would​ ​cause​ ​irreparable​

​harm to the appellants.​

​4.​ ​Per​ ​contra,​ ​the​ ​learned​​counsel​​appearing​​for​​the​​respondents​

​vehemently​​opposed​​the​​afore​​prayer​​and​​submitted​​that​​it​​is​​well​​settled​

​legal​ ​position​ ​that​ ​a​ ​writ​ ​appeal​ ​against​ ​an​ ​interim​ ​order​ ​is​ ​not​

​maintainable.​ ​Therefore,​ ​this​ ​Court​ ​may​ ​dismiss​ ​the​ ​writ​ ​appeal.​ ​He​

​further​ ​pointed​ ​out​ ​that​ ​a​ ​similar​ ​interim​ ​order​ ​passed​ ​in​

​W.P.(C)No.21675​​of​​2025​ ​was​​challenged​​in​​W.A.No​​.1516​​of​​2025.​​This​

​Court​ ​vide​ ​judgment​ ​dated​ ​17.07.2025​ ​had​ ​dismissed​ ​W.A.No​​.1516​ ​of​

​2025​ ​at​ ​the​ ​admission​ ​stage​ ​itself​ ​on​ ​the​ ​ground​ ​that​ ​granting​ ​any​

​interim relief as prayed for would amount to grant of final relief.​

​5.​​On​​perusal​​of​​the​​interim​​relief​​as​​claimed​​in​​the​​writ​​petition,​​it​

​can​ ​be​ ​seen​ ​that​ ​the​ ​appellants​ ​have​ ​prayed​ ​not​ ​to​ ​proceed​ ​with​ ​the​

​publishing​​of​​fresh​​voters​​list​​in​​the​​6th​​respondent​​Panchayat​​based​​on​

​the​ ​present​ ​delimitation​ ​notification​ ​produced​ ​as​ ​Ext.P4​ ​and​ ​connected​ ​W.ANo.1748 of 2025 6​ 2025:KER:56866​ ​

​annexures.​ ​In​ ​the​ ​present​ ​case​ ​since​ ​the​​interim​​order​​passed​​is​​not​​in​

​the​ ​nature​ ​of​ ​a​ ​final​ ​relief,​ ​the​ ​writ​ ​appeal​ ​would​ ​not​ ​be​ ​maintainable.​

​Moreover,​​the​​learned​​Single​​Judge​​has​​already​​observed​​that​​the​ ​final​

​delimitation​ ​notification​ ​would​ ​be​ ​subject​ ​to​ ​the​ ​outcome​ ​of​ ​the​ ​writ​

​petition.​​As​​such,​​the​​learned​​Single​​Judge​​has​​not​​committed​​any​​error​

​in​​rejecting​​the​​prayer​​for​​interim​​relief.​​No​​final​​decision​​has​​been​​taken​

​as​ ​yet​ ​in​ ​the​ ​writ​ ​petition,​ ​therefore,​ ​the​ ​present​ ​writ​ ​appeal​ ​is​ ​not​

​maintainable.​

​6.​​In​​view​​of​​the​​above,​​we​​are​​of​​the​​considered​​opinion​​that​​the​

​interim​ ​relief​ ​prayed​ ​for​ ​cannot​ ​be​ ​granted​ ​at​ ​this​​stage.​​The​​discretion​

​exercised​ ​by​ ​the​ ​learned​ ​Single​ ​Judge​ ​was​ ​judicious​ ​and​ ​no​ ​error​ ​can​

​be found in the order passed by the learned Single Judge.​

​Accordingly,​ ​the​ ​present​ ​writ​ ​appeal​ ​being​ ​bereft​ ​of​ ​merit​ ​and​

​substance is hereby dismissed.​

​Sd/-​

SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI​ ​ JUDGE​ ​ Sd/-​ ​ SYAM KUMAR V.M.​ ​ JUDGE​ ​ MC/30.7​ ​