JUDGMENT : BASANT BALAJI, J. The petitioners are the plaintiffs and the respondents are the defendants in O.S.667/2010. The suit was decreed as per Ext.P1, which reads as follows: “1. It is hereby declared that, as on 01.04.2008, AWH was having 42 members. (Since D2 is no more, as on today there are only 41 members are available) A commission shall be appointed by the court for supervising the general body meeting of the members of AWH and for the election of executive committee members consisting of 13 members including the office bearers. The general body meeting and election shall be conducted strictly in accordance with the provisions of Ext.A5 bye-laws, after giving notice to all the aforesaid members. The commissioner appointed by the court shall act as the returning officer in the election. The entire process of election shall be completed within a period of two months from this day.” 2. Against the judgment and decree, an appeal was filed as AS No.1/2017 before the Sub Court, Kozhikode. The first appellate court, by Ext.P2 judgment dated 21.12.2017, allowed the appeal and modified the preliminary decree as follows: “In the result, appeal is allowed in part and Judgement and decree dated 31-7-17 is set aside. A modified preliminary decree is passed in the following terms: 1) Declaring that as on 1.4.2008 AWH was having alltogether 18 members and as on today on the death of defendant No.2 during the pendency of the suit, there are following 17 members: (1) Kunhahammed Kutty, (2) Ahammed Koya, (3) Muhammed K P, (4) Abdurahiman.M, (5) Aboobacker C.P., (6) Habeeb.V, (7) K. Ahammed, (8) Fakrudheen. T, (9) Ibrahim Kutty, (10) Thahira.V, (11) Amina. T, (12) Aysha Kalliyath, (13) Fariya K.M., (14)Abdul Saleem P.P., (15) Ali. M., (16) Ayshabeevi, (17)Abdul Rasheed.V.V.) 2) A Commissioner shall be appointed by the lower court for supervising the general body meeting of the members of AWH and for the election of executive committee members consisting of 13 members including the office bearers. Terms and condition as well as his batta will be decide by the Lower court at the time of his appointment. 3) A general body meeting and election shall be conducted strictly in accordance with the provisions of Ext.A5 bye-law and after giving notice to all the members. 4) The Commissioner appointed by the court shall act as the returning officer in the election. 3) A general body meeting and election shall be conducted strictly in accordance with the provisions of Ext.A5 bye-law and after giving notice to all the members. 4) The Commissioner appointed by the court shall act as the returning officer in the election. 5) The commissioner shall complete the entire process of election within one month from his date of appointment. 6) Both sides shall suffer their respective costs.” 3. Respondents 20 to 24 and 26, filed RSA No.111/2018, before this Court and this Court by judgment dated 17.08.2023 allowed the RSA and the decree and judgment of the first appellate court was set aside, and that of the Trial Court was restored. 4. Acting on the judgment of the Munsiff Court, the Advocate Commissioner had issued Ext.P6 draft election notification on 25.10.2024. The plaintiffs filed objection to the draft election notification as Ext.P8 and the 1st defendant filed objection on behalf of defendants 3 to 9, 11 and 12, as Ext.P7. While so, the matter was taken before the Apex Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.53444/2023. The Apex Court, granted the leave and converted it into Civil Appeal Nos.3734-3735/2024 and passed an order on 20.11.2024, which reads as follows: “In such circumstances and taking note of the fact that the last election to AWH was conducted more than 14 years back, we are of the considered view that an interim order on the following lines can be passed:- (i) Let the Advocate Commissioner appointed by the Court, as per the impugned judgment under challenge, declare the date of election after complying with the necessary basic procedures for conducting election. (ii) An election shall be conducted, on the date fixed by the Court appointed commissioner. (iii) 23 persons whose rights to cast votes are under challenge be permitted to cast vote in one box and the votes cast by the others whose such rights are not at issue be put in a separate box. (iv) After the election, the right to cast votes of the aforesaid 23 persons would be decided in these appeals and the question whether such votes are to be counted or not to be counted would depend upon the outcome of the pending appeals. The counting and declaration of result of the election shall be done only after obtaining permission from this Court.” 5. The counting and declaration of result of the election shall be done only after obtaining permission from this Court.” 5. The Advocate Commissioner filed an interim report on 13.12.2024 along with the election notification. Acting on the interim report, Ext.P14 was passed by the Munsiff, leaving certain directions to the Advocate Commissioner for conducting the election. The directions issued are as follows: “1. The Commissioner shall conduct the election strictly in accordance with the directions given by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 3734-3735/2024. 2. The Advocate Commissioner shall prepare a detailed voters list of the members of the Association 25 days before the date of election and shall publish the same. 3. The Advocate Commissioner can finalize the list of the members of Association who are entitled to vote on the basis of approved identity proofs with photographs in it. 4. The Advocate Commissioner shall submit a draft ballot paper for approval and after conducting the election, the sealed boxes containing the ballot papers should be kept under the safe custody of the court. 5. The Advocate Commissioner is at liberty to take decisions on videographing the entire election, counting and result declaration. If such videographing is done, it should be submitted to the court. 6. No sufficient grounds were made by the plaintiffs for changing the place of election and for not seeking the assistance of the receiver appointed by the court for the smooth conduct of election.” 6. The counsel for the petitioners is highly aggrieved by the directions issued to the Advocate Commissioner to prepare a detailed voters list by himself and also the fact that the commissioner is at liberty to conduct the counting and declaration of the results, which is against the order of the Apex Court in Ext.P9. 7. On receipt of notice, respondents 1 to 3 have been represented by Adv.P.A Harish. For the other respondents, notice has been served on the counsel appearing for the respondents before the Trial Court and a memo has been filed evidencing the same. 8. Adv.PA Harish, submits that clause nos.5 in Ext.P14 directs the commissioner to take a decision on videographing the entire election, counting, and declaration of the results. For the other respondents, notice has been served on the counsel appearing for the respondents before the Trial Court and a memo has been filed evidencing the same. 8. Adv.PA Harish, submits that clause nos.5 in Ext.P14 directs the commissioner to take a decision on videographing the entire election, counting, and declaration of the results. He concedes to the fact that the counting and declaration of the results cannot be done by the commissioner, as the Apex Court has directed to keep the votes counted separately in two boxes, and the counting and declaration of results shall only be done after obtaining permission from the Apex Court. 9. In Ext.P9, the question was regarding the 23 persons who are included in the voters list. The Apex Court categorically held that the 23 persons who have the right to vote are permitted to cast the votes in one box, and the votes cast by the others shall be kept in a separate box. 10. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that a draft voters list has been published by the commissioner and they intend to raise an objection to the inclusion of three members in the list of 17 persons. As directed by the Apex Court as well as the Munsiff, the Commissioner shall take into consideration the objections, if any, filed by the petitioners and then publish a final voters list in respect of the 17 members and 23 members in dispute. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the election shall be conducted strictly in accordance with Ext.P9 as well as the bye-laws. The votes cast shall be kept separately in two boxes as directed by the Apex Court. The directions contained in Ext.P14 to the extent that the Advocate Commissioner is entitled to videograph the counting and election and declaration of the results, is interfered and is set aside. The Advocate Commissioner is free to conduct videography of the election process till the casting of votes by protecting the secrecy of election. With the above observation, this original petition is disposed of.