[ad_1]
Kerala High Court
Jiji Thomas vs The Kerala State Election Commission on 8 August, 2025
Author: Amit Rawal
Bench: Amit Rawal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. V. BALAKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 17TH SRAVANA, 1947
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 26.09.2024 IN WP(C) NO.26132 OF
2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONERS:
1 JIJI THOMAS,
AGED 49 YEARS
W/O. THOMAS, THACHARUKUDIYIL HOUSE, MANDAPAM P.O.,
CHITTARIKKAL VIA, KASARGOD DISTRICT, PIN - 671326
2 JIJI P.J.,
AGED 53 YEARS
S/O. JOSEPH, PUTHIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KAMBALLUR P.O.,
CHERUPUZHA, VIA, KASARGOD DISTRICT, PIN - 670511
3 VINEETH T. JOSEPH,
AGED 45 YEARS
S/O. JOSEPH, THENGUMPALLIL HOUSE, KANNIVAYAL P.O.,
KASARGOD DISTRICT, PIN - 670511
4 DETTY FRANCIS,
AGED 54 YEARS
W/O. FRANCIS, KANDANCHIRAYIL, CHITTARIKKAL P.O.,
KASARGOD DISTRICT, PIN - 671326
BY ADVS.
SHRI.SHINTO THOMAS
SRI.NAVANEETH.N.NATH
SRI.RAM VINAYAK
SMT.ABHIRAMI S.
SHRI.ABDUL LATHEEF P.M.
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024 -2-
2025:KER:59779
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
1 THE KERALA STATE ELECTION COMMISSION,
JANAHITHAM, TC-27/6(2), VIKAS BHAVAN P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY,
PIN - 695033
2 JOSEPH MUTHOLI,
AGED 59 YEARS
S/O.GEORGE, RESIDING AT MUTHOLI HOUSE,
CHITTARIKKAL P.O., NEELESWARAM, KASARGOD
DISTRICT, PIN - 671326
BY ADVS.
SHRI.DEEPU LAL MOHAN, SC, STATE ELECTION
COMMISSION, KERALA
SRI.S.M.PRASANTH
SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.)
SHRI.SHEHIN S.
SMT.DEVIKA S.
SMT.RESHMA DAS P.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
08.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024 -3-
2025:KER:59779
JUDGMENT
AMIT RAWAL, J.
The present intra court appeal is directed against
the judgment of the Single Bench, whereby the writ
petition filed by the appellants challenging the
action/order dated 2.7.2024 of the Kerala State Election
Commission, allowing O.P.Nos.6, 7, 8 and 9 of 2021 filed
by the second respondent in the writ petition as well as
the appeal, seeking disqualification of the appellants as
per the provisions of Section 3 of the Kerala Local
Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 1999
(hereinafter called ‘Act No.11 of 1999’) and by taking
into consideration the provisions of Paragraph No.8 of
the Local Authorities Election Symbols (Reservation and
Allotment) Order, 2017, has been dismissed.
2. Succinctly, the facts in brief for
adjudication of the controversy are enumerated herein
below:
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024 -4-
2025:KER:59779
Appellants, for the elections of Panchayat in the
year 2020, submitted their nomination papers as
independent candidates but used the symbol of ‘Foot
Ball’, which was a free symbol allotted to the party called
Revolutionary Marxist Party of India (hereinafter called
‘RMPI’). Copy of the nomination papers available at
page Nos.262, 263, 264 and 265 in the writ appeal reveal
that all the appellants submitted their nomination papers
as independent candidates but was allotted the free
symbol allotted to RMPI, much less the said party also
vide letter dated 22.11.2020 Ext.P3 recommended the
allotment of the symbol of ‘foot ball’ to the returning
officer. The contents of the letter Ext.P3 and Exts.P4,
P4(a) and P4(b) collectively read as under:
Ext.P3
“RMPI
Revolutionary Maexist Party of India
Kerala State Committee
Room 152, Hotel New Nalanda,
Aurobindo Ghosh Road, Kozhikode -1.
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024 -5- 2025:KER:59779 [email protected] To The Returning Officer Date:22.11.2020 Interested in allotting the
Revolutionary Marxist Party’s election symbol,
football, to Jiji Thomas Thacharukudiyil, who is
contesting in the Local Government Elections
from Mandapam Ward/Division in East Eleri
Grama/Block/Jilla Panchayat.
Your’s faithfully,
Sd/- N.Venu,
Secretary,
RMPI
Kerala State Committee”
Ext.P4
“Form 25A
(See Rule – 52)
(For use when there is competition for a
position)
As per Section 80 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj
Act, 1994 (13 of 1994)
Declaration of election results
Election to G-14032 East Eleri Grama Panchayat
from 001 Mandapam ConstituencyAs per the provisions contained in Section 80 of
the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (13 of 1994)
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024 -6-2025:KER:59779
and Section 52 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj
(Conduct of Elections) Rules, 1995, in order to
fill the vacancy from the above mentioned
constituency, I hereby declare thatShri/Shrimati Jiji Thomas, Thacharukudiyil
nominated as independent candidate has been
duly elected.
Place:
Date:16/12/2020 Sd/-
The Election Officer, Thomas VT,
Co-operative Society Assistant
Registrar (General),
Vellarikund,
Parappa P.O.”
3. Paragraph No.8 of the aforementioned
symbols order 2017 reads as under:
“8. When a candidate shall be deemed to be set
up by a political party. For the purpose of this
Order, a candidate shall be deemed to be set up
by a political party, only if –
(i) The candidate has mentioned the name of the
political party in the prescribed column in the
nomination paper and has chosen the symbol, if
any, reserved or allotted for that party in the
nomination paper. Provided that if a political
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024 -7-2025:KER:59779
party recommends the symbol of the party to a
candidate who has not mentioned in the name of
the political party or its symbol in the
nomination paper and has mentioned a symbol
from the list of free symbols in the nomination
paper, he is eligible to get the symbol of that
(ii) A notice by the political party in writing to
that effect, not later than 3.00 PM on the last
date for withdrawn of nominations, is delivered
to the returning officer of the constituency;
(iii) The said notice is signed by the person
authorized by political party from time to time
to recommend the symbol that political party;
Provided that no facsimile signature, signature
by means of rubber stamp, signature
transmitted by electronic means etc of such
authorized persons shall be accepted.
(iv) The State President, Secretary or Convener
as the case may be, of the political party shall
authorize a person to recommend the symbol of
that political party and shall intimate his name
and office to the State Election Commission,
District Election Officer or the concerned
Returning Officer.”
4. The aforementioned paragraph, takes
into consideration certain situations like the one involved
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024 -8-
2025:KER:59779
in the present case, where a candidate who chooses to
contest the election independently, but takes the aid of
the symbol being allotted to the party shall be deemed to
be a candidate set up by a political party.
5. In the aforementioned elections all the
appellants had won the election and for the purpose of
the election of the President, Vice President or the
Secretary, candidates from the other party i.e., the
Indian National Congress as well as the Democratic
Development Front had contested. The RMPI issued a
whip to the appellants to cast the votes in support of the
candidates for Indian National Congress. However, the
appellants cast the votes in favour of the candidates
supported by the Democratic Development Front. By
taking the proviso 2 Section 18, considering the
appellants to be deemed candidates of the RMPI, four(4)
complaints were filed before the Election Commission
seeking disqualification as per the provisions of Section 3
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024 -9-
2025:KER:59779
of the Act 11 of 1991. Section 3 of the Act reads as
under:
“3. Disqualification on ground of defection.
(1)Notwithstanding anything contained in the
Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (13 of 1994), or
in the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994 (20 of
1994), or in any other law for the time being in
force, subject to the other provisions of this Act,
(a)if a member of a local authority
belonging to any political party voluntarily
gives up his membership of such political
party, or if such member, contrary to any
direction in writing issued by the political
party to which he belongs or by a person or
authority authorised by it in this behalf in
the manner prescribed, votes or abstains
from voting,
(i)in a meeting of a Municipality, in an
election of its Chairperson, Deputy
Chairperson, a member of a Standing
Committee or the Chairman of a
Standing Committee; or(ii)in a
meeting of a Panchayat, in an election
of its President, Vice President, a
member of a Standing Committee or
the Chairman of the Standing
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024 -10-2025:KER:59779
Committee; or in an voting on a no-
confidence motion against any one of
them expect a member of a Standing
Committee;
(b)if an independent member belonging to
any coalition withdraws from such coalition
or joins any political party or any other
coalition, or if such a member, contrary to
any direction in writing issued by a person
or authority authorised by the coalition in
this behalf in the manner prescribed, votes
or abstains from Voting, –
(i)in a meeting of a Municipality, in an
election of its President, Vice
President, a member of a Standing
Committee or the Chairman of the
Standing Committee; or
(ii)in a meeting of a Panchayat in an
election of its President, Vice-
President, a member of a Standing
Committee or the Chairman of the
Standing Committee; or in an voting
on a no-confidence motion against any
one of them except a member of a
Standing Committee;
(c)if an independent member not belonging
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024 -11-
2025:KER:59779
to any coalition, joins any political party or
coalition; he shall be disqualified for being
a member of that local authority.
Explanation. – For the purpose of the
section an elected member of a local
authority shall be deemed to be a member
belonging to the political party if there is
any such party, by which he was set up as a
candidate for the election.”
6. Election Commission noticing the fact
that the appellants though had contested the election
independently, but used the symbol as per the
recommendations ibid of the RMPI, who are deemed
candidates of the said political party and therefore acted
in defiance to the whip issued by the party for the
purpose of holding the elections of the President of the
Panchayat in not supporting the candidates being
supported by the said party, disqualified the appellants
for the period of six(6) years.
7. The aforementioned order of the election
commission, as noticed above, was challenged before
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024 -12-
2025:KER:59779
this Court in the writ petition and this court, by
interpreting the aforementioned provisions in the Act,
dismissed the writ petition observing as under:
“24. Here it would be relevant to note
that prior to the 2020 General Election to Local
Self Government Institutions in the State of
Kerala, the State Election Commission had in
pursuance of paragraph 7 of the Symbols Order,
2017, issued an up-to-date list of election
symbols as per notification No.278/2020/SEC
dated 06.11.2020 and published in Kerala
Gazette Extraordinary No.2690 dated
6.11.2020.
25. Thus, in the said notification, the
free symbols for independent candidates which
include the symbols allotted to registered
unrecognized political parties having no
member or members in the Kerala Legislative
Assembly or in any of the Local Self Government
Institutions in the State of Kerala were provided
in Table-IV. Accordingly, the election symbol
‘Football’ has been included in Table-IV of said
notification at serial number 33 and it is
mentioned therein that the said symbol has
been allotted to Revolutionary Marxist Party of
India (RMPI) on priority basis.
26. Therefore, in view of paragraph
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024 -13-2025:KER:59779
3(4), 4(4) & 7(d) of the Symbols Order, 2017, as
far as the election symbol ‘football’ is
concerned, as on the date of 2020 General
Election to Local Self Government Institutions
in the State of Kerala, the said symbol though
included as a free symbol, stood allotted to
Revolutionary Marxist Party of India (RMPI) on
priority basis; meaning thereby that if RMPI
(which was at that time a registered
unrecognized political parties having no
member or members in the Kerala Legislative
Assembly or in any of the Local Self Government
Institutions in the State of Kerala) recommends
said symbol to a candidate in the manner
prescribed in paragraph 8(ii) to (iv), the
Returning Officer would be bound to allot said
symbol to the candidate on priority basis.
27. Further, on such allotment of the
election symbol ‘Football’ to the RMPI
candidate, the legal consequence as envisaged
in Proviso to Paragraph 8(i) of the Symbols
Order, 2017 would also set in and the respective
candidate who has been allotted the election
symbol ‘Football’ solely on the basis of priority
letter issued by RMPI, would be deemed to be
set up by said Political Party.
28. Therefore, in the instant case, even
though in the nomination papers, the Petitioners
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024 -14-2025:KER:59779
have mentioned that they are independent
candidates and though they have shown
‘Football’ (which is included as a ‘free symbol’ in
Table IV of notification No.278/2020/SCE dated
6.11.2020) as their first preference election
symbol, still, since it is admitted fact that at
time of scrutiny of nominations, the Returning
Officer has allotted the election symbol
‘Football’ to the Petitioners solely on the basis
of priority letters submitted by RMPI, the legal
effect of deeming provisions of Proviso to
Paragraph 8(i) of the Symbols Order, 2017 is
applicable in case of the Petitioners and
accordingly, the Petitioners shall be deemed to
set up by RMPI.
29. Further, the Explanation to Section
3 of the Kerala Local Authorities (Prohibition of
Defection) Act, 1999 explicitly provides that for
the purpose of Section 3 (Disqualification on
ground of Defection) an elected member of a
local authority shall be deemed to be a member
belonging to the political party, if there is any
such party, by which he was [set up or given
support] as a candidate for the election.
30. Hence, in the 2020 General
Election to Local Self Government Institutions,
by virtue of Proviso to Paragraph 8(i) of the
Local Authorities Election Symbols (Reservation
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024 -15-2025:KER:59779
and Allotment) Order, 2017, since the
Petitioners are deemed to be set up as
candidates of RMPI from Ward Nos.1, 14, 10 &
3 respectively of East Elari Grama Panchayat,
the Petitioners are also deemed to be members
belonging to RMPI in view of Explanation to
Section 3 of the Kerala Local Authorities
(Prohibition of Defection) Act, 1999.
31. In this context, it would be relevant
to note that allotment of election symbols is
done by the Returning Officer at the time of
scrutiny of nominations and such scrutiny is
done after the last date of making nominations.
It is hence that when the list of nominations is
published by the Returning Officers in FORM
No.3 as provided in Rule 9 of the Kerala
Panchayat Raj (Conduct of Election) Rules,
1995, there is no provision in FORM No.3 for
entering the election symbol of the candidates.
However, after scrutiny of nominations, while
publishing the list of contesting candidates by
the Returning Officer in FORM No.6 as provided
in Rule 13 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Conduct
of Election) Rules, 1995, there is a provision in
FORM No.6 for entering the election symbols
allotted to the contesting candidates.
32. Therefore, the fact that at the time
of submitting nomination papers, the Petitioners
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024 -16-2025:KER:59779
have declared in their nomination papers that
they are not associated with any Political Party
and that they are Independent candidates does
not have any relevance since, admittedly, at the
time of scrutiny of nominations, the Returning
Officer has allotted election symbol ‘Football’ to
the Petitioners solely on the basis of priority
letters submitted by RMPI. Given the above, the
contention of the learned senior counsel for the
writ petitioners that they had contested the
election as independent candidates and the
same is seen from the declaration stated in the
nomination papers, cannot be accepted. In view
of the findings rendered above, the writ
petitioners case must be covered by the
explanation to Section 3 of the Act, and the
petitioners must be held deemed to be set up by
the RMPI. The Commission has come to the
correct conclusion relying on the appropriate
provisions. Under such circumstances, I do not
find any illegality warranting interference of the
order of the Commission.
Accordingly, the writ petition fails and
is dismissed.”
8. Mr.Navaneeth Kumar, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that the
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024 -17-
2025:KER:59779
proviso in the Act No.11 of 1999 was introduced only in
the year 1992 and prior to amendment, there was no
such proviso and therefore a candidate, who had
contested independently though under the symbol of the
party could not be considered to be a deemed candidate
of a political party, for the reason that the RMPI had not
contested the election of the Panchayat by fielding any
candidate. In support of the contention, relied upon
paragraph No.9 of the judgment in Abdul Haque v.
Pathumma (2005 KHC 167) that even if the party had
supported a candidate, the candidature of the candidate,
as per the contents of the nomination paper, would be
treated only as independent and not a deemed candidate
of the political party. Also relied upon paragraph No.12
of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in
Mathew Joseph v. Joseph John (2024 KHC Online
752). The same reads as under:
“12. The purpose of anti-defection law is to
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024 -18-2025:KER:59779
prevent switching over from one party to
another or switching over allegiance by
betraying the mandate of the electorate. The
provisions will have to be interpreted
objectively. Thus, a member is identified as part
of a political party based on the declaration
given under Rule 3(1) of the Kerala Local
Authorities (Disqualification of Defected
Members) Rules, 2000. If that declaration is
betrayed by the act of the elected member, that
would entail disqualification. The law itself is
clear under S.3(1)(a) of the Kerala Local
Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act,
1999.”
9. On the other hand, Mr.Ramkumar,
learned Senior Counsel assisted by Smt.Devika
submitted that the judgment of the Single Bench is
clearly based upon the interpretation of the provisions of
paragraph No.8 as well as Section 3 and the appellants
squarely fall within the aforementioned conditions and
have rightly been disqualified in not agreeing to the whip
of the RMPI for the purpose of the elections of the
President of the Panchayat. The judgments cited above,
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024 -19-
2025:KER:59779
would not be applicable particularly judgment in Abdul
Haque as it was in respect of the unamended provisions
of the Act and Symbols Order, 2017 which has
undergone a sea change by amendment in 2020.
10. We have heard learned counsel for the
parties and appraised the paper book.
11. On cumulative reading of the provisions
of paragraph No.8 of the Symbols Order, 2017, it is
evident that if a candidate has chosen to contest the
election independently but has taken the support of the
symbol allotted to a political party, there is no bar for
using the symbol then he/she would be considered to be
a deemed candidate of the political party. The
nomination papers though reflect that the appellants
submitted their candidature as independent and had
given the name of three symbols i.e., the foot ball, mango
and umbrella, however, were allotted ‘foot ball’ on the
recommendation letter, extracted above, of the RMPI
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024 -20-
2025:KER:59779
submitted to the Returning Officer. Thus, in view of the
recommendation, in our considered view, the candidates
would be considered to be deemed candidates and
rightly so, the learned Single Bench considered the
appellants to be the deemed candidates of the said
political party.
12. The stage for disqualification only arise
in case a person does not act in tandem with the
provisions of Section 3 of Act 11 of the 1999. It is not in
dispute that despite having been elected as the member
of the Panchayat for the purpose of elections of the
President, the appellants did not adhere to the
recommendations of the RMPI for casting the vote in
favour of the candidate belonging to Indian National
Congress supported by the RMPI, but cast the vote in
favour of Democratic Development Front. The provisions
of the Section were rightly so, attracted.
13. We do not find any justification in tinkering
WA NO. 1723 OF 2024 -21-
2025:KER:59779
with the judgment of the learned Single Bench as it does
not suffer from any illegality and perversity, much less
the judgment cited at bar as it pertains to the provisions
of the Act, which were not in force at the time when the
appellants contested the elections.
Appeal sans merit, accordingly, dismissed.
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL
JUDGE
Sd/-
P. V. BALAKRISHNAN
JUDGE
vv
[ad_2]
Source link