WP/645/2003 of SERULA COMMUNIDADE GAONKAR ASSOCIATION(SCGA) Vs STATE OF GOA AND 3 ORS., on 17 December 2003

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

WRIT PETITION NO. 645 OF 2003

SERULA COMMUNIDADE GAONKAR ASSOCIATION(SCGA)

Versus

....Petitioners

STATE OF GOA AND 3 ORS.,

....Respondents

SHRI V.A. LAWANDE,SHRI JOHN CARDOZO

-Coram:A.M.KHANWILKAR &P. V. HARDAS, JJ.

-Date:17th December, 2003

P.C.:

Heard counsel for the respective partiesThe apprehension expressed in thispetition, which is founded on pastexperience, is, although election dateof election programme has already beennotified, the same will not proceed, asper the schedule, but is likely to bedisrupted, for reasons best known to theauthorities. This apprehension standsdispelled, by the affidavit filed byrespondent no.3 before us, placing onrecord clear programme how the electionis to proceed. In view of the affidavitfiled, we see no reason to doubt thecorrectness thereof or the bonafide ofthat statement. In that view of thematter, the apprehension, as expressed,cannot be the basis for interference inwrit jurisdiction.

2. The second contention pressedbefore us is that some persons, who arenot eligible to be voters, are includedin the voters list and their nameswould be retained, which would result inmalpractice. The objection is forinclusion of those voters, whose namesare at Exhibit 'R', at page 64. Whetherthose persons are eligible or not is anissue which will have to be decided bythe Collector or his nominee, who willbe put in charge of the electionprocess. If the petitioners have anyobjection with regard to any particularname, it will be open to them to make arepresentation in that behalf on orbefore 22nd December 2003 and we see noreason to doubt that the concernedOfficer would not consider suchrepresentation/objection, which he isotherwise obliged to in law, beforeissuance of final voters list. In thecircumstances, there is no question ofgranting any relief or direction at thisstage.3. With regard to other reliefsclaimed in this petition, we se noreason to go into those questions atthis stage. The same are left open to beexamined in appropriate proceedings, iffiled.4. In the circumstances, thispetition is disposed of with the aboveobservations and more particularly on the basis of the assurance given on behalf of the Collector that theelection programme will proceed as perthe schedule stated in the reply affidavit and in accordance with law.

A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.

P. V. HARDAS, J.