election and ballot related matters. In In re: Legislative Referendum No. 384, State Question 711, 2004 OK 75, 107 P.3d 556 (as corrected Sept. 28, 2004), this Court declined to assume original jurisdiction over a challenge to the constitutionality of a legislative referendum to add a provision to the Oklahoma Constitution. Writing separately, Justice Kauger stressed the importance of timeliness in a challenge such as this one, stating: 4 The law fixes election dates and the petitioners are well aware that the question is scheduled to appear on the November 2, 2004, general election ballot. They should also be aware of the necessary work required, the time consumed and the cost of causing the ballots to be printed. It is the duty of the petitioners to proceed with [ 15, 357 P.2d 421 (<HOLDING>); Harding v. State Election Bd., 1946 OK 171, ¶
holding the matter of the eligibility of a candidate for an office must be adjudicated at an early date and before an election is held holding that an award of back pay is an issue for the court holding that it may be held an abuse of discretion for the court to deny leave unless there is a demonstrable showing of prejudice to an opposing party holding that election case was not moot after election because there is a reasonable expectation that the same complaining parties would be subject to that same action in the future holding that upon commencement of the election process mandamus will not lie to prevent the inclusion of a candidate on the official ballot because by that time the case has become moot