1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 30 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2018

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV

WRIT PETITION Nos.50390-391 OF 2018 (LB-RES)

BETWEEN:

1. Mrs. Malathi B. Acharya W/o Mr. Bhaskara Acharya, Aged about 44 years, President of Bommarabettu Village Panchayath, Hiriadka Post, Taluk and District – 576 113, Resident of ‘Manasa’, D.No.6-116(W), Basthi Bommarabettu, Hiriadka Post, Udupi Taluk and District – 576 113.

2. Mr. Chandrashekar S/o Mr. Annayya Poojari, Aged about 43 years, Vice President of Bommarabettu Village Panchayath, Hiriadka Post, Udupi Taluk and District – 576 113, Resident of ‘Kamala Nivas’, Guddangadi Post, Bommarabettu Village, Udupi Taluk and District – 576 113. …Petitioners (By Dr. S. Arumugham, Advocate)

2

AND:

1. The State of Karnataka, Represented by its Secretary, Department of Panchyath Raj, Vidhanasoudha, Bengaluru-560001.

2. Assistant Commissioner Kundapura Sub-Division, Kundapura, – 576 201.

3. Taluk Panchayath Represented by its Executive Officer, Udupi, Udupi Taluk – 576 101.

4. Bommarabettu Village Panchayath Represented by its Panchayath Development Officer, Udupi Taluk and District – 576 113.

5. Mr. Dayanand Poojari S/o Mr. Sariya Poojari, Aged about 43 years, Member, Bommarabettu Village Panchayath, Hiriadka Post, Udupi Taluk and District – 576 113.

6. Mr. Ratnakar Shetty S/o Mr. Shankar Shetty, Aged about 38 years, Member, Bommarabettu Village Panchayath, Hiriadka Post, Udupi Taluk and District – 576 113.

3

7. Mrs. Saroja Naik W/o Mr. Manjunatha Naik, Aged about 45 years, Member, Bommarabettu Village Panchayath, Hiriadka Post, Udupi Taluk and District – 576 113.

8. Mrs. Savitha Naik W/o Mr. Jayaram Naik, Aged about 43 years, Member, Bommarabettu Village Panchayath, Hiriadka Post, Udupi Taluk and District – 576 113.

9. Mrs. Sujatha D/o Mr. Gopala Sherigara, Aged about 47 years, Member, Bommarabettu Village Panchayath, Hiriadka Post, Udupi Taluk and District – 576 113.

10. Mr. Narayana S/o Mr. Subba Poojari, Aged about 42 years, Member, Bommarabettu Village Panchayath, Hiriadka Post, Udupi Taluk and District – 576 113.

11. Mrs. Vinaya W/o Mr. Gopala Sherigara, Aged about 45 years, Member, Bommarabettu Village Panchayath, Hiriadka Post, Udupi Taluk and District – 576 113.

4

12. Mrs. Revathi W/o Mr. Udaya Naik, Aged about 37 years, Member, Bommarabettu Village Panchayath, Hiriadka Post, Udupi Taluk and District – 576 113.

13. Mrs. Jayanthi Aged about 49 years, Member, Bommarabettu Village Panchayath, Hiriadka Post, Udupi Taluk and District – 576 113.

14. Mrs. Pushpalatha W/o Mr. Raju Banara, Aged about 46 years, Member, Bommarabettu Village Panchayath, Hiriadka Post, Udupi Taluk and District – 576 113.

15. Mr. Harish Salian S/o Mr. Sudhakara Madiwala, Aged about 34 years, Member, Bommarabettu Village Panchayath, Hiriadka Post, Udupi Taluk and District – 576 113.

16. Mrs. Mamatha W/o Mr. Umesh Nayak, Aged about 44 years, Member, Bommarabettu Village Panchayath, Hiriadka Post, Udupi Taluk and District – 576 113.

5

17. Mr. Gopala S/o Mr. Ganga, Aged about 44 years, Member, Bommarabettu Village Panchayath, Hiriadka Post, Udupi Taluk and District – 576 113.

18. Mrs. Usha W/o Mr. Gopala Naik, Aged about 46 years, Member, Bommarabettu Village Panchayath, Hiriadka Post, Udupi Taluk and District – 576 113. ...Respondents (By Smt. B.P. Radha, AGA for R-1 & R-2 Sri. K. Prasanna Shetty, Advocate for R-5 to R-18 R-3 & R-4 are dispensed with)

These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of praying to quash the impugned notices at Annexure-A served on 08.11.2018 issued by respondent No.2 and etc.,

These Writ Petitions coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:

O R D E R

The petitioners are the President and Vice President of Bommarabettu Village Panchayath have assailed the notice at Annexure-A whereby, 14.11.2018 was the date

6

fixed to consider the motion of No Confidence that has been moved by the members.

2. This Court by order dated 13.11.2018 had granted an interim order of stay of the notice at

Annexure-A. The learned counsel appearing for the members-respondent Nos.5 to 18 have filed the application for vacating stay of the interim order dated

13.11.2018. The complaint was made on 03.11.2018 and on the same date, the Assistant Commissioner has issued a notice fixing the date of the meeting as

14.11.2018. The petitioners states that the notice was served on them only on 08.11.2018. It is clear that as per

Rule 3 (2) of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Motion of No-

Confidence against Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of

Grama Panchayat) Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as

‘the Rules 1994’ for short), fifteen days clear notice is required to be given before meeting is convened to

7

consider the motion of No Confidence. The said rule has been breached, by convening the meeting on 14.11.2018.

3. The learned counsel appearing for respondent

Nos.5 to 18 fairly concede that there is violation of Rule

3(2) of the Rules, 1994 and states that at this point of time they may be granted liberty to move a fresh motion of No Confidence with necessary directions to the

Assistant Commissioner to strictly adhere to the procedure prescribed by dealing with the said motion No

Confidence.

4. In view of the admitted violation of Rule 3(2) of the Rules, 1994, insofar as notice of the complaint dated 03.11.2018 has been given to the petitioners only on 08.11.2018 fixing the date of meeting as 14.11.2018, the notice at Annexure-A is set aside. While setting aside the Annexure-A, it is being noticed that the Assistant

Commissioner has not adhered to the procedure prescribed under Section 49(1) of the Karnataka Gram

8

Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act, 1993’ for short) as well as Rule 3(2) of the

Rules, 1994, while considering the motion of No

Confidence.

5. In the present case, the motion of No

Confidence has failed directly as a result of non adherence of the procedure stipulated while issuing the notice at Annexure-A. Liberty is granted to the members to move fresh motion of No Confidence, in accordance with Section 49 of the Act, 1993. The Assistant

Commissioner in the event of such motion of No

Confidence being moved, to ensure strict compliance of procedural requirements as regards notice etc., as provided under Section 49 of the Act, 1993 read with

Rule 3(2) of the Rules, 1994.

9

Petitions are disposed of with the above observations.

Sd/- JUDGE

MBM