Siby J Adappoor vs State Of Kerala
2025 Latest Caselaw 10461 Ker

Kerala High Court

Siby J Adappoor vs State Of Kerala on 4 November, 2025

Author: Anil K.Narendran

Bench: Anil K.Narendran

                                   1
WA No.2632 of 2025
                                                    2025:KER:83581

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

                                   &

             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALEE KRISHNA S.

   TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 / 13TH KARTHIKA, 1947

                          WA NO. 2632 OF 2025

         AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 31.10.2025 IN WP(C) NO.39001 OF 2025

OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA


APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

             SIBY J ADAPPOOR
             AGED 62 YEARS
             S/O JOSEPH, ADAPPOOR HOUSE, KARUKADAM P.O,
             KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686681


             BY ADVS.
             SRI.BASIL CHANDY VAVACHAN
             SMT.CHARUTHA BHAIJU
             SHRI.BASIL SAJAN
             SMT.FATHIM NAVAS
             SMT.KAVYA RANI JAYAPRAKASH
             SMT.LEKSHMI PRIYA V.
             SHRI.MUHAMMED SHUHAIB A.S.
             SMT.RESHMA SUKUMARAN
             SMT.AISWARYA JALIN
             SHRI.BASIL SCARIA


RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

     1       STATE OF KERALA
             REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT
             OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, GOVERNMENT OF
             KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
                                  2
WA No.2632 of 2025
                                                   2025:KER:83581


     2      THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
            COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN
            - 682030

     3      THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION
            JANAHITHAM, TC27/6(2), VIKAS BHAVAN,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033

     4      DISTRICT JOINT DIRECTOR
            OFFICE OF JOINT DIRECTOR, LSGD, CIVIL STATION,
            KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030

     5      ELECTORAL REGISTRAR OFFICER
            ELECTORAL REGISTRAR OFFICE, KOTHAMANGALAM
            MUNICIPALITY, KOTHAMANGALAM P.O ERNAKULAM, PIN -
            686681

     6      THE SECRETARY
            KOTHAMANGALAM MUNICIPALITY, KOTHAMANGALAM P.O
            ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686681


            BY ADV SHRI.DEEPU LAL MOHAN, SC, STATE ELECTION
            COMMISSION, KERALA

            SMT. DEEPA K. R. , SPL. GP;
            SRI. JOICE GEORGE, SC, KOTHAMANGALAM MUNICIPALITY


      THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.11.2025,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
                                       3
WA No.2632 of 2025
                                                           2025:KER:83581


                               JUDGMENT

Muralee Krishna, J.

The appellant, who is a registered voter of Kothamangalam

Municipality and a permanent resident of Ward No.22 of that

Municipality, filed W.P.(C)No.39001 of 2025, under Article 226 of

the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs:

"(i) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records relating to the Ext.P4 order of the 4th Respondent regarding the inclusion of Ward No.22 of Kothamangalam Municipality in the reservation category and quash the same as being arbitrary, illegal, and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 243T of the Constitution of India and the Election Commission guideline;

(ii) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the Ext.P7 rejection order passed by the 4th Respondent rejecting the Petitioner's Ext.P5 representation;

(iii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondents to subject Ward No. 22 of Kothamangalam Municipality to the mandatory lot procedure as prescribed by the Election Commission guidelines in Ext.P2 and P3".

2. In the writ petition on behalf of the 3rd respondent,

2025:KER:83581

State Election Commission, a statement dated 27.10.2025 has

been filed by the learned Standing Counsel, opposing the reliefs

sought in the writ petition and producing therewith Annexure

R3(a) and R3(b) documents.

3. On 31.10.2025, when the writ petition came up for

consideration, the learned Single Judge admitted the matter on

file. The learned Standing Counsel for the Election Commission

took notice for respondents 3 and 5, the learned Special

Government Pleader took notice for respondents 1, 2 and 4, and

the learned Standing Counsel for the Kothamangalam Municipality

took notice for the 6th respondent.

4. The learned Single Judge passed an interim order to the

effect that the election to be conducted in Ward No.22 of

Kothamangalam Municipality will be subject to the result of the

writ petition. Paragraphs 3 to 4 and the last paragraph of that

order read thus:

"3. The short point raised by the petitioner is that, the petitioner is a member of Ward No. 22 of Kothamangalam Municipality. The newly formed Ward No.22 has been carved out by taking approximately 36% of voters from the

2025:KER:83581

erstwhile Ward No.20 and approximately 39% of voters from the erstwhile Ward No.21 is the submission. It is submitted that the erstwhile Ward No.20 had been included in the reservation category for the last two consecutive elections immediately preceding the upcoming election. The erstwhile Ward No.21 had been included in the reservation category for the last election immediately preceding the upcoming election is the submission. Now in effect the voters in Ward No.22 are facing the consecutive reservation. In such circumstances, the petitioner is not able to participate in the election because of the consecutive reservation of his Ward is the grievance.

4. I think a prima facie case is made out by the petitioner. But in AKM Hassan Uzzaman v. Union of India [(1982) 2 SCC 218], the Apex Court observed that High Court shall not exercise its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution in a manner that has the tendency or effect of postponing an election, which is reasonably imminent. The counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in Election Commission v. Ashok Kumar [2000 KHC 642] and submitted that the election process is not started. Even then, the fact remains that the election to the Local Self Government Institutions in Kerala has to be completed on or before 20.12.2025, as per the mandate of the Constitution. Now only about 40 days remaining. In such circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere with the reservation exercise undertaken by the respondents.

2025:KER:83581

However, the reservation to Ward No.22 shall be subject to the result of the writ petition".

5. Challenging that interim order dated 31.10.2025 of the

learned Single Judge, the appellant-writ petitioner is before this

Court with the instant writ appeal.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the

learned Special Government Pleader, the learned Standing

Counsel for the State Election Commission and the learned

Standing Counsel for Kothamangalam Municipality.

7. The learned counsel for the appellant would point out the

judgment of this Court dated 03.11.2025 in W.A.No.2626 of 2025

and submitted that the issue involved in the present appeal is also

similar to that in W.A.No.2626 of 2025. The learned counsel further

submitted that no purpose will be served to the appellant by the

impugned interim order granted by the learned Single Judge.

8. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel for

the State Election Commission would submit about the scope of

interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India in election matters.

2025:KER:83581

9. In W.A.No.2626 of 2025, we have considered a similar

interim order as that of the instant case, under challenge in that

writ appeal. After considering the rival submissions, we have

disposed of that writ appeal by the judgment dated 03.11.2025.

Paragraphs 6 to 8 of that judgment read thus:

"6. The learned counsel for the appellant would contend that the learned Single Judge ought to have granted an interim relief as sought for in the writ petition, i.e., staying the implementation of Ext.P4 order dated 21.10.2025 of the 3rd respondent District Collector, pending disposal of the writ petition. After noticing that the petitioner has made out a prima facie case, the learned Single Judge declined interim relief placing reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in AKM Hassan Uzzman v. Union of India [(1982) 2 SCC 218], which was a case in which no materials were before the High Court for entertaining the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The learned counsel would also place reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in Election Commission v. Ashok Kumar [(2000) 8 SCC 216]. The learned counsel would submit that the interim order of the learned Single Judge that the election to be conducted in ward 14- Vannapuram of Idukki District Panchayat will be subject to the result of the writ petition will not serve any purpose,

2025:KER:83581

since no interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is legally permissible on the election to be conducted in the ward in question, based on the notification issued by the State Election Commission.

7. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala State Election Commission, after placing reliance on the decisions of the Apex Court referred to in the statement dated 29.10.2025 filed in the writ petition, on behalf of the 2nd respondent, would argue on the scope of interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in election matters and the mandate of Article 243E of the Constitution of India to ensure that the Panchayats are constituted before the expiry of its term of five years. We also heard arguments of the learned Special Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 3 and also the learned Standing Counsel for Idukki District Panchayat for respondents 4 and 5.

8. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Standing Counsel for the State Election Commission has referred to various provisions in Ext.P2 guidelines dated 24.09.2025 issued by the State Election Commission for fixing reserved constituencies in Local Self Government Institutions. Since the scope of this writ appeal is limited to the challenge made against the interim order dated 31.10.2025 and the writ petition, i.e., W.P.(C)No.39600 of 2025, is pending before the learned Single Judge, we do not propose to consider the

2025:KER:83581

rival contentions on the above aspect in this writ appeal. The specific contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the interim order of the learned Single Judge that the election to be conducted in ward 14- Vannapuram of Idukki District Panchayat will be subject to the result of the writ petition will not serve any purpose, since no interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is legally permissible on the election to be conducted in the ward in question, based on the notification issued by the State Election Commission".

10. Having considered the pleadings and materials on

record and also the submissions made at the Bar, we deem it

appropriate to dispose of this writ appeal in a similar line as that

of W.A.No.2626 of 2025.

In the result, the writ appeal is disposed of by setting aside the

interim order dated 31.10.2025 of the learned Single Judge in

W.P.(C)No.39001 of 2025, leaving open the legal and factual

contentions raised by both sides and without prejudice to their

right to raise appropriate contentions before the learned Single

Judge in the pending writ petition. It is made clear that this Court

has not expressed anything on the merits of the matter pending

before the learned Single Judge. It would be open to the appellant-

2025:KER:83581

petitioner to bring up the writ petition before the learned Single

Judge for expeditious disposal before the issuance of the election

notification by the State Election Commission.

Sd/-

ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE

Sd/-

MURALEE KRISHNA S., JUDGE

sks