Kochi: In a setback to the Twenty20 and NDA in Thripunithura constituency, the Returning Officer (RO) rejected a petition filed by their candidate and actor Anjali Nair seeking to change her name on ballot labels and Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) from ‘Anjali PV’ to her widely recognised screen name. The RO cited that postal and home voting have already begun, and changing the name on EVMs now is 'administratively impossible'.

The order was issued on Saturday by RO Rakesh VR, following directions from the High Court of Kerala, which had instructed the officer to hear the candidate’s representation and pass an urgent decision.

The candidate argued that she is popularly known among voters as ‘Anjali Nair’ rather than her official name, Anjali PV, as recorded in the electoral roll. In her petition, she pointed out that her entire campaign, ranging from posters to public outreach, had been conducted under the name ‘Anjali Nair’. She contended that retaining ‘Anjali PV’ on the ballot could confuse voters and undermine their “informational autonomy” in identifying their preferred candidate.

However, in a detailed order, the RO outlined multiple grounds for rejecting the plea, primarily citing procedural lapses and timing issues. The RO noted that the candidate had filed her nomination on March 23 using the name ‘Anjali PV’, consistent with the electoral roll. While Rule 8(2) of the Conduct of Election Rules allows candidates to use a name by which they are popularly known, such a request must be made in writing before the preparation of the final list of contesting candidates.

The officer also rejected the candidate’s claim that she had submitted an earlier request, stating that there was no documentary proof or acknowledgement to support it. According to the order, the first verifiable written request seeking the name change was received only on March 31, five days after the publication of the final list of candidates.

Further, the RO pointed out that during a March 28 meeting convened to allow candidates and their agents to review the draft ballot paper, the petitioner’s election agent was present but did not raise any objection regarding the name.

'Administrative impossibility' after voting began
A key factor in the rejection was the advanced stage of the election process. The RO highlighted that home voting for senior citizens and persons with disabilities, along with postal ballots, had already commenced on March 30.

Allowing a name change at this stage, the order stated, would create a situation where two different versions of the ballot - postal ballots and EVMs - would carry different names for the same candidate, violating the principle of uniformity in the electoral process.

The officer described the logistical implications like recalling printed ballots, reprinting them, and reconfiguring EVMs as “administratively impossible,” especially with polling scheduled for April 9.

Dismissing concerns over voter confusion, the RO observed that ballot papers and EVMs display the candidate’s photograph and party symbol, which serve as clear identifiers. He also noted that Anjali PV is the only candidate with the name ‘Anjali’ in the constituency, further reducing any possibility of misidentification.

The decision is seen as a blow to the Twenty20’s campaign, which had heavily relied on the candidate’s public recognition as ‘Anjali Nair’ in what is shaping up to be a tightly contested electoral battle.

Meanwhile, Twenty20 issued a statement alleging that the petition was rejected due to political motives and added that she would decide on further actions after consulting with her party.