1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AT

DATED THIS THE 24 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2014

B E F O R E

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA

WRIT PETITION NO.9765/2014 (LB-ELE)

BETWEEN:

Sri. D.S. Vishwanath S/o Hanumanthappa Aged about 40 years R/o Ballekere village Kasaba hobli, Kadur taluk, Chickmagalore District- 577 548 …PETITIONER

(By Sri K.B. Onkar, Adv.)

AND:

1. The State of Karnataka Rep. by its Principal Secretary Department of Rural Development & Panchayathraj, M.S. Building, Bangalore-01.

2. The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Panchayat, Chikmagalore Chikmagalore District-577 102.

3. The Executive Officer Taluk Panchayat Kadur Taluk, 2

Kadur Chikmagalore District-577 548.

4. Smt. Mamatha W/o B.H. Vijaykumar, Aged about 38 years R/o Ballekere Village Kasaba hobli, Kadur taluk, Chikmagalore Dist.-577 548.

5. Sri.B.J.Prabhakara Rao, The Presiding Officer, AEE (Panchayat Raj Engineering Sub-Dvn) Kadur-577 548 Dist. .. RESPONDENTS

(By Sri H.T. Narendra Prasad, AGA for R-1 to R-3)

This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of , praying to set aside the election meeting notification issued by the R-5, Presiding Officer, dated 14.2.2014 as per Annexure-F.

This petition coming on for preliminary hearing this day, the Court made the following:

ORDER

A complaint filed by the petitioner against the 4 th respondent before the 3 rd respondent having not been considered, W.P.No.47816/2012 filed by the petitioner was disposed of on 04.12.2013 directing the 3 rd 3

respondent to consider the complaint in accordance with law expeditiously and within one month period.

Annexures-B, C and D having been submitted by the petitioner, the 3 rd respondent issued an official memorandum dated 01.02.2014 as at Annexure-E to the

Panchayat Development Officer, Ballekere Grama

Panchayat, Kadur Taluk, to produce the records etc., on

06.02.2014. The 5 th respondent having given a meeting

notice on 14.02.2014 under Rule 4 of Karnataka Panchayat

Raj (Election of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Grama

Panchayat) Rules, 1995, vide Annexure-F, this writ petition

was filed to quash Annexure-F and prohibit the 4 th respondent from participating or voting in the election scheduled to be held on 25.02.2014 and to direct the 3rd respondent to disqualify the 4 th respondent by concluding the enquiry initiated in compliance of the order, as at

Annexure-A.

2. Sri. K.B. Onkar, learned advocate, contended that the action of the 5 th respondent in issuing Annexure-F 4

to the 4 th respondent during the pendency of the matter before the 3 rd respondent as per Annexure-E pursuant to the order as at Annexure-A, being arbitrary and illegal, interference is called for. He submitted that the 4 th respondent who is facing serious allegation, if allowed to participate and vote in the election of the President and

Vice President scheduled to be held on 25.02.2014, would vitiate the process of Election.

3. Sri. H.T. Narendra Prasad, learned AGA, on the other hand, contended that the 4 th respondent having not

been disqualified and continuing to be a member of the

Panchayat, is entitled to participate in the meetings of the

Panchayat. He submitted that the 5 th respondent has not committed any error or illegality in giving Annexure-F to the 4 th respondent. He submitted that petitioner has no right to seek a writ prohibiting the 4 th respondent from participating or voting in the election to be held on

25.02.2014 i.e., for electing the President and Vice

President to the Panchayat. 5

4. Perused the writ record.

5. The 5 th respondent having been appointed as a Returning Officer to conduct the election to the post of

President and Vice President of the Panchayat, has given the notice vide Annexure-F to all the members of the

Panchayat. The petitioner and the 4 th respondent being

the members of the Panchayat, have been given the said

notice. The 4 th respondent having not been disqualified

from the membership of the Panchayat and the competent

authority having not declared the seat / post of the 4th respondent as having fallen vacant i.e., by following the procedure provided under the Karnataka Panchayat Raj

Act, the 5 th respondent is justified in giving the meeting notice as at Annexure-F to the 4th respondent. There is neither arbitrariness nor illegality committed by the 5 th respondent in the matter of giving the notice as at

Annexure-F to all the members of the Panchayat, including the 4th respondent, who having been duly elected, cannot be restrained from participating or voting for electing the 6

President and Vice President of the Panchayat in the election scheduled to be held on 25.02.2014.

6. The 3 rd respondent is not the Authority vested

with the power to disqualify the 4 th respondent from the membership of the Panchayat. In view of the order as at

Annexure-A, the petitioner having submitted Annexures-B,

C and D, the 3 rd respondent has issued official

memorandum as at Annexure-E to the PDO. The 3 rd respondent may proceed to conclude the proceedings pursuant to Annexure-E by giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the PDO and the 4 th respondent and arrive at an appropriate decision.

This writ petition, for the reliefs prayed, is untenable.

Hence, the petition is rejected.

Sri. H.T. Narendra Prasad, Learned AGA is permitted to file memo of appearance in the Registry within four weeks.

Sd/- JUDGE sac*