Smt. Subha vs The State Of Karnataka
2021 Latest Caselaw 6166 Kant

                           1



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

                      BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA

        WRIT PETITION No.13511/2021 (LB RES)

BETWEEN

SMT. SUBHA
W/O SRIDHAR
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
R/AT SINGENA AGRAHARA
SARJAPURA HOBLI
ANEKAL TALUK
BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT-562 106
                                      ... PETITIONER

[BY SRI.A.S.PONNANNA, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W
    SRI. PRAKASH T. HEBBAR, ADV.
    (PHYSICAL HEARING)]

AND

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
       DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT
       AND PANCHAYATH RAJ
       VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD,
       BENGALURU-560 001

2.     THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
       DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND
       PANCHAYAT RAJ
       VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD,
       BENGALURU-560 001
                             2



3.   THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
     ZILLA PANCHAYATH
     BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT
     S. KARIYAPPA ROAD, BANASHANKARI
     BENGALURU-560 070

4.   THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
     MUTTANALLUR GRAM PANCHAYATH
     SARJAPUR HOBLI ANEKAL TALUK
     BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT-562 106

5.   SHRI. RAMESH
     MAJOR
     WORKING AS
     SUPERINTENDENT
     BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT PANCHAYATH
     BENGALURU-562 106
                                 ... RESPONDENTS

[BY SMT.PRATHIMA HONNAPURA, AGA FOR R1 AND R2 (PHYSICAL HEARING);

SRI. MAHESH R. UPPIN, ADV. FOR R3;

R4 AND R5 ARE SERVED]

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNX-A BEARING DTD. 04.06.2021 PASSED BY THE R-2 AND PERMIT THE PETITIONER TO DISCHARGE HER DUTIES AS THE MEMBER OF THE MUTTANALLUR GRAM PANCHAYATH, ANEKAL TALUK FOR THE CURRENT TERM AND ETC.,

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

The petitioner calls in question order dated

04.06.2021, whereby the petitioner is removed as a

Member of the Gram Panchayat in terms of Section

43A(1)(vi) of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat

Raj Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for

short).

2. Heard Sri. A.S.Ponnanna, learned Senior

counsel appearing for the petitioner, Smt. Prathima

Honnapura, AGA for respondent Nos.1 and 2,

Sri.Mahesh R. Uppin, learned counsel for respondent

No.3 and have perused the material on record.

3. Sans details, the facts in brief germane for

consideration of the lis, are as follows:-

The petitioner is an ex-Vice-President and Member

of Muthanallur Gram Panchayat ('the Panchayat' for

short) and the term of the petitioner comes to an end on

27-12-2025. The respondent/State during the last term

of the petitioner initiated proceedings for her removal

from the membership of the Panchayat under Section

43A of the Act on the basis of a letter addressed by the

4th respondent/Panchayat Development Officer. It is

upon the said communication a show cause notice was

issued to the petitioner on 03.07.2018 seeking to show

cause as to why the allegations made by the 3rd

respondent/Chief Executive Officer should not be

accepted as the allegation was that the petitioner, her

husband and other Members have locked the Panchayat

and obstructed the office work inter alia. In reply to the

said show cause notice, the petitioner submitted a reply

explaining the circumstances and refuting the

allegations on 17.07.2018 and it is the claim of the

petitioner that without holding any enquiry that is

contemplated in law, she was removed from primary

membership of the Panchayat in terms of Section 43A(1)

of the Act. This order was called in question by the

petitioner along with others before this Court in Writ

Petition No.32127/2019 and connected cases. This

Court disposed of the writ petition by its order dated

10.02.2020 by observing as follows:

"3. On perusal of the said order no doubt contains the contentions of the petitioners as well as details of the enquiry including recording of the statement of the then Panchayath Development Officer Ramesh to the effect that the husband of the vice president had abused him. However, there is no finding in the order as regards to the acts complained viz., that the officials were locked up and that the husband of the Vice President had abused the Panchayath Development Officer etc., all of which amounted to misconduct leading to the conclusion that there was misconduct as contemplated under the Act.

4. Learned Additional Government Advocate would however, point out that an FIR has been lodged with respect to the said incident and that a Compact Disc. containing recording of the incident is on record and

evidence cannot be improved and accordingly, taking note of the material on record, Court ought to construe the impugned order as being sufficient for the purpose of taking action in terms of the requirement of the Section 43A of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayath Raj Act, 1993.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also advanced various contentions on the merits of the matter.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners further contends that on 16.01.2019, though there is a reference with respect to proceedings held, there was no sufficient opportunity and the conclusion is arrived at without adverting to the contentions of the petitioner.

7. However, taking note of the nature of order and its consequences as regards to the elected members, the impugned order is required to be a speaking order. The requirement of an order required to be a speaking order is to enable the aggrieved

party to challenge the impugned order.

Insofar the said requirement is concerned there should be categorical finding as to the nature of misconduct and that the misconduct so made out in the light of the material placed and proof of such misconduct is sufficient as would require consequences of the order under Section 43-A of the Act to be visited on such misconduct. Without expressing any opinion as regards to the merits of the matter, matter is remanded back to the 1st respondent to resume the enquiry from stage of 16.01.2019. The 1st respondent is at liberty to afford an additional opportunity to the petitioners to put forth their case as regard to evidence on record including the Compact Disc which is stated to be a record of the incident. Thereafter the 1st respondent is at liberty to conclude the proceedings in accordance with applicable procedure.

8. The 1st respondent to take note of the observations made above and record categorical finding as regards the incident which according to the 1st respondent is misconduct leading to passing of the order under Section 43-A of the Act. In light of the serious allegations made out, the proceedings before the 1st respondent to be concluded expeditiously within a period not later than 30 days from the date of release of the order.

9. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. However, it is made clear that the petitioners are not to take any decision having financial implications except with respect to day-to-day management of the local body.

10. It is also made clear that in light of the nature of allegations made out, there should be no efforts by the petitioners to tamper with the evidence on record or to threaten any of the witnesses who have deposed and furnished their statements

before the enquiring authority. It is made clear that the petitioners are required to co- operate with the proceedings."

This court while disposing of the matter holds that

the contention of the petitioner is that though there is

reference with regard to the proceedings, there was no

sufficient opportunity and the conclusion arrived at

without adverting to the contention of the petitioner.

What is later observed assumes significance for

consideration of the present petition. This Court taking

note of the order and its consequence with regard to

elected Members it was of the opinion that the order of

removal had to bear application of mind. In furtherance

of the said requirement, this Court directed that there

should be a categorical finding as to the nature of

misconduct and the misconduct made out in the light of

the material placed and proved of such misconduct

should be sufficient to pass an order under Section 43A.

Therefore, no opinion was expressed with regard to

merits of the matter and the matter was remanded back

to the 1st respondent to resume the enquiry from the

date of 16.01.2019. 16.01.2019 was the date on which

proceedings commenced before the Competent

Authority. It is the proceeding dated 16.01.2019 that led

to passing of the order dated 04.07.2019, which was

impugned in the writ petition supra. Therefore, this

Court directed that the inquiry be resumed from the

stage at which proceedings commenced before the

Member-Secretary. The enquiry had to be resumed

from that stage itself.

4. The petitioner after disposal of the writ

petition files objections refuting the allegations and also

contending that this Court had directed that every one

of the allegations made against the petitioner should be

considered in detail. Pursuant to the objections filed

the matter was taken up by Government for

consideration. The allegation of the learned senior

counsel representing the petitioner is that there is no

proceeding worth the name that has gone on prior to

passing of the present order impugned. The order sheet

that is produced would reveal that the petitioner was

not afforded any opportunity whatever and no

misconduct, as directed by this Court, is independently

considered in the order impugned. The proceedings that

have gone on after the disposal of the writ petition are

as follows:

"«µÀAiÀÄ: ªÀÄÄvÀÛ£À®ÆègÀÄ UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁAiÀÄw G¥ÁzsÀåPÀëgÁzÀ ²æêÀÄw ±ÀĨsÀ, ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀÄUÀ¼ÁzÀ ²æêÀÄw UËgÀªÀÄä ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ²æêÀÄw eÉÆåÃw EªÀgÀÄUÀ¼À «gÀÄzÀÞ 43(J) gÀr PÀæªÀÄPÉÊUÉƼÀÄîªÀ §UÉÎ

63) PÀArPÉ 61 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 62 gÀ §UÉÎ DzÉñÀPÉÌ ªÀÄAr¹zÉ.

      64) ¦        ¸À»/- 13/3/2020

      65) CPÁ
      ¥Àæ.PÁ. (¥ÀA.gÁeï) gÀªÀgÀ ¢£ÁAPÀ            ªÀÄvÀÄÛ   ªÉüÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß

¤UÀ¢ü¥Àr¸À®ÄPÀqÀvÀªÀ£ÀÄß ªÀÄAr¹zÉ.

66) ¤.(¥ÀA.gÁd) ¸À»/- 18/3

67) ¸À»/- (¦.Dgï.)

»A.¥ÀÄl¢AzÀ:-

¢:7-4-2020 gÀAzÀÄ 11:00 UÀAmÉUÉ ¸ÀzÀj «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¤UÀ¢ü¥Àr¸À®Ä ¸À.¥Àæ.PÁ. gÀªÀgÀÄ w½¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ.

68) ¤.(¥ÀA.gÁ) ¸À»/0 20/3/

69) VI 57 Sd/- 21/3

70) PÀArPÉ 67 gÀ°è w½¹zÀAvÉ PÉÆëqï - 19 ¤AzÁV «ZÁgÀuÉ ¤UÀ¢¥Àr¹®è.

ªÀÄÄA¢£À «ZÁgÀuÉ £ÀqɸÀ®Ä ¢£ÁAPÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÉÃ¼É ¤UÀ¢¥Àr¸ÀĪÀAvÉ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀæzÁs £À PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð (¥ÀA.gÁeï) gÀªÀgÀ£ÀÄß PÉÆÃgÀ§ºÀÄzÁVzÉ.

77) ¸À»/-    ¸À»/- 30/4/2020

78)C/PÁ

¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀæzsÁ£À PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð (¥ÀA.gÁeï) gÀªÀgÀ D¥ÀÛ PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ðAiÀĪÀgÀÄ ªÀÄÄA¢£À «ZÁgÀuÉ £ÀqɸÀ®Ä ¢£ÁAPÀ ºÁUÀÆ ªÉÃ¼É ¤UÀ¢ü¥Àr¸ÀĪÀAvÉ ªÀiÁ£Àå ¥Àæ.PÁ (¥ÀA.gÁeï) gÀªÀgÉÆA¢UÉ ZÀað¹ w½¸ÀĪÀAvÉ PÉÆÃgÀ¯ÁVzÉ. ¸À»/- 2/5/2020

79) P.S. to Prl.Sec (Pan.Raj) Sd/- 16/6/

80) ¤.¥ÀA.gÁ-16/6 ¸À»/-8/6

81) U/s Sd/- 8/6

82) «ZÁgÀuÉUÉ ºÁdgÁUÀĪÀ w¼ÀĪÀ½PÉ ¥ÀvÀæªÀ£ÀÄß C£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£É ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸À»UÁV ¸À°è¹zÉ.

¸À»/9/6/2020

83) ¥Àæ/             ¸À»/-9/6/2020

84) C.PÁ ºÉÆgÀr¹zÉ       ¸À»/- 9/6/2020

85) ¢£ÁAPÀ: 10.6.2020 gÀAzÀÄ ºÉÆgÀr¹zÉ.

86) ¢£ÁAPÀ: 16-6-2020 gÀAzÀÄ «ZÁgÀuÉ £ÀqÉ¢gÀĪÀÅ¢®è. ªÀÄvÉÆÛAzÀÄ ¢£À «ZÁgÀuÉ £ÀqɸÀ®Ä ¢£ÁAPÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÉÃ¼É ¤UÀ¢ü¥Àr¸ÀĪÀAvÉ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀæzÁs £À PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð 9¥ÀA.gÁeï) gÀªÀgÀ£ÀÄß PÉÆÃgÀ§ºÀÄzÁVzÉ. ¸À»/-18/6/2020

87) ¦/

87) PÀArPÉ 86gÀ ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£ÉUÉC£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£ÉPÉÆÃjPÀqÀvÀ ¸À°è¹zÉ. ¸À»/-18/6/2020

88) C.PÁ ªÀÄÄA¢£À «ZÁgÀuÉ £ÀqɸÀ®Ä ¢£ÁAPÀ ºÁUÀÆ ªÉÃ¼É ¤UÀ¢ü¥Àr¹PÉÆqÀĪÀAvÉ PÉÆÃjzÉ.

89) P.S. to Prl.Sec (Pan.Raj) On July 7, (11.00 UÀAmÉUÉ) ¸À»/-22/6

90) U/s Sd/- 22/6

91) PÀArPÉ 89 gÀAvÉ «ZÁgÀuÁ w¼ÀĪÀ½PÉ ¥ÀvÀæ£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£É ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸À»UÁV ¸À°è¹zÉ.

¸À»/- 24/6/2020

92) ¦/                            ¸À»/- 25/6/2020

93) D.ºÉÆgÀr¹.                    ¸À»/- 29/6

94) ¢£ÁAPÀ:30.6.2020 gÀAzÀÄ ºÉÆgÀr¹zÉ.

95) ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀæzÁs £À PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð (¥ÀA.gÁeï) gÀªÀgÀÄ ¸ÀÆa¹zÀAvÉ ¢£ÁAPÀ:26-8-20 gÀAzÀÄ ªÀÄzsÁåºÀß 12:30 UÀAmÉUÉ «ZÁgÀuÉ £ÀqɸÀ®Ä «ZÁgÀuÁ ¥ÀvÀæ ¹zÀÞ¥Àr¹ C£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£É ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸À»UÁV ¸À°è¹zÉ.

¸À»/- 28/8/2020

96) ¦Ã/ ¸À»/- 20/8/2020

97) C.gÁ ºÉÆgÀr¹zÉ. ¸À»/-20/8/

98) ¢£ÁAPÀ: 20.8.2020 gÀAzÀÄ ºÉÆgÀr¹zÉ.

99) ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀæzsÁ£ÀPÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð(¥ÀA.gÁeï) gÀªÀgÀÄ ¸ÀÆa¹zÀAvÉ ¢£ÁAPÀ:2-9-20 gÀAzÀÄ C¥ÀgÁºÀß 12:30 UÀAmÉUÉ «ZÁgÀuÉ £ÀqɸÀ®Ä «ZÁgÀuÁ ¥ÀvÀæ ¹zÀÞ¥Àr¹ C£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£É ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸À»UÁV ¸À°è¹zÉ.

100) ¥Á|              ¸À»/- 26/8/2020

101) C.gÁ ºÉÆgÀr¹zÉ.       ¸À»/- 28.8.2020

102) ¢£ÁAPÀ 29.8.2020 gÀAzÀÄ ºÉÆgÀr¹zÉ.

103) ¢£ÁAPÀ 9/9/2020 gÀAzÀÄ             «ZÁgÀuÉ £ÀqÉ¢gÀĪÀÅ¢®è
DzÀÝjAzÀ ªÀÄÄA¢£À «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß       £ÀqɸÀ®Ä ¢£ÁAPÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ
ªÉüÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¤ÃqÀĪÀAvÉ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ      ¥ÀæzÁs £À PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ðUÀ¼ÀÄ
(¥ÀA.gÁeï) gÀªÀgÀ£ÀÄß PÉÆÃgÀ§ºÀÄzÀÄ.    ¸À»/-4/11/2020

104) ¦Ã (gÀeÉ) C/PÁ.            ¸À»/- 4/11

105) ¤ (¥ÀA.gÁeï) ¢£ÁAPÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀªÀÄAiÀĪÀ£ÀÄß ¤UÀ¢¥Àr¹ DzÉò¸ÀĪÀAvÉ PÉÆÃj ¸À°è¹zÉ.

¸À»/- 6/11/2020

106) ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀæzÁs £À PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ðUÀ¼ÀÄ, ¥ÀA.gÁeï

107) Director (PETITIONER) Sd/- 23/11/20

108) C.PÁ) ¸À»/- 23.11.2020

109) «ZÁgÀuÁ w¼ÀĪÀ½PÉ ¥ÀvÀæ ¸À»UÁV ¸À°è¹zÉ. ¸À»/-

25/11/2020

110) ¦Ã/ºÉÆgÀr¹       ¸À»/-25/11

111) ¢£ÁAPÀ 26/11/2020 gÀAzÀÄ ºÉÆgÀr¹zÉ

112) ¢£ÁAPÀ 10.02.2021 gÀAzÀÄ «ZÁgÀuÉ £ÀqÉ¢gÀĪÀÅ¢®è, ªÀÄÄA¢£À «ZÁgÀuÉ £ÀqɸÀ®Ä ¢£ÁAPÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÉÃ¼É ¤UÀ¢¥Àr¸ÀĪÀAvÉ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀæzÁs £À PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð (¥ÀA.gÁeï) gÀªÀgÀ£ÀÄß PÉÆÃgÀ§ºÀÄzÁVzÉ. ¸À»/- 16/2/21

113) ¦Ã/ ¸À»/- 16/2/21

114) C.PÁ\ ¸À»/- 16/2/21

115) ¤.(¥ÀA.gÁeï) ¢£ÁAPÀ ºÁUÀÆ ¸ÀªÀÄAiÀÄ ¤ÃqÀ®Ä PÉÆÃjzÉ. ¸À»/-16/2

116) ¥Àæ.PÁ (¥ÀA.gÁeï) ¢£ÁAPÀ:15/03/2021 gÀAzÀÄ 11:00 UÀAmÉUÉ ¸À.¥Àæ.PÁ. gÀªÀgÀÄ w½¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. ¸À»/- 2/3/21

118) ¸À»/- 2/3/21

119) «ZÁgÀuÉ ºÁdgÁw w¼ÀĪÀ½PÉ ¥ÀvÀæ ¸À»UÁV ¸À°è¹zÉ.

¸À»/- 3/3/21

120) E/J ºÉÆgÀr¹      ¸À»/- 3/3/21

121) ¢£ÁAPÀ 6.3.2021 gÀAzÀÄ ºÉÆgÀr¹zÉ.

122) F ¥ÀæPÀgÀtPÉÌ ¸ÀA§AzsÀ¥ÀlÖAvÉ DzÉñÀzÀ ¥ÀÄl ¹zÀÝ¥Àr¹ C£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£É ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸À»UÁV ¸À°è¹zÉ. ¸À»/-

30/3/21





     123) ¦Ã/                   ¸À»/- 30/3/21

     124) C/PÁ. C£ÀĪÉÆâ¸À§ºÀÄzÀÄ                       ¸À»/-31/3/21

     125) ¤(¥ÀA.gÁeï) C£ÀĪÉÆâ¸À§ºÀÄzÀÄ                       ¸À»/- 1/4/21

     126) ¥Àæ.PÁ. ¥ÀA.gÁeï)"

It is further germane to notice certain orders

passed on specific dates. On 02.09.2020 an order is

passed in the proceedings which read as follows:

"DzÉñÀzÀ ¥Àæw ¢£ÁAPÀ:02-09-2020 PÀ£ÁðlPÀ GZÀÒ £ÁåAiÀÄ®AiÀÄzÀ jmï ¦n±À£ï ¸ÀASÉå:32127- 32129/2019(LB-RES) gÀ°è DzÉò¹gÀĪÀAvÉ, ¸ÀzÀj ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ°è ªÉÄîä£À« zÁgÀgÁVzÀÝ ªÀÄÄvÀÛ£À®ÆègÀÄ UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁAiÀÄwAiÀÄ ²æêÀÄw ±ÀĨsÁ, ²æêÀÄw J£ï. eÉÆåÃw ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ²æêÀÄw UËgÀªÀÄä EªÀgÀÄUÀ½UÉ F PÀbÉÃj¬ÄAzÀ ¢£ÁAPÀ:26-08- 2020gÀAzÀÄ £ÉÆÃnÃ¸ï ¤ÃqÀ¯ÁVvÀÄÛ. «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß WEBEX ªÀÄÄSÁAvÀgÀ PÉÊUÉwÛPÉƼÀî¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ. ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀÄUÀ¼ÁzÀ ²æêÀÄw ±ÀĨsÁ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ²æêÀÄw UËgÀªÀÄä ºÁdgÁVgÀÄvÁÛgÉ, ²æêÀÄw eÉÆåÃw UÉÊgÀÄ ºÁdgÁVgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. ªÀÄÄvÀÛ£À®ÆègÀÄ UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁAiÀÄwAiÀÄ ¥Àæ¸ÀÄÛvÀ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw C©üªÀÈ¢Þ C¢üPÁjAiÀiÁzÀ ²æà JZï.«.PÀȵÀÚ¥Àà gÀªÀgÀÄ ºÁdgÁVgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÁzÀ ²æêÀÄw ±ÀĨsÁ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ²æêÀÄw UËgÀªÀÄä ªÀiÁvÀ£ÁqÀÄvÁÛ, ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ°è vÀªÀÄä

¥ÀgÀªÁV gÀPÀëuÉ ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä ªÀQîgÀ CªÀ±ÀåPÀvÉ EgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. F ¢£À ªÀQîgÀÄ PÉÆëqï ¸ÉÆÃAQ¤AzÀ ºÁdgÁUÀzÉà EgÀĪÀ PÁgÀt ªÀÄÄAzÉ MAzÀÄ ¢£ÁAPÀªÀ£ÀÄß ¤UÀ¢ü¥Àr¸À®Ä PÉÆÃjPÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸À°è¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. EªÀgÀ PÉÆÃjPÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¥ÀjUÀt¹, MAzÀÄ CfðAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸À°è¸À®Ä w½¸ÀÄvÁÛ «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¢£ÁAPÀ:09- 09-2020gÀAzÀÄ ªÀÄzsÁåºÀß 12.30 UÀAmÉUÉ ¤UÀ¢ü¥Àr¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ."

The proceedings were taken up by video

conference as the situation was that the State was

engulfed with Covid-19 and proceedings had to go on in

the light of the order passed by this Court. Therefore, it

was taken up by way of video conference. Again on

02.12.2020 the following order is passed:

" D¥Á¢vÀ ZÀÄ£Á¬Äw ¥Àæw¤¢ü: UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw ªÀiÁf G¥ÁzsÀåPÀëgÁzÀ ²æêÀÄw ±ÀĨsÀ, ªÀÄÄvÁÛ£À®ÆègÀÄ UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw, D£ÉÃPÀ¯ï vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀ f¯Éè.

¥ÀæPÀgÀtªÀ£ÀÄß PÀgÉAiÀįÁ¬ÄvÀÄ.

¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀgÀªÁV ²æà J.²æäªÁ¸ÀAiÀÄå, UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð UÉæÃqï-2, ªÀÄÄvÁÛ£À®ÆègÀÄ UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw, D£ÉÃPÀ¯ï vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀ f¯Éè EªÀgÀÄ ºÁdjgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.

ªÀiÁf G¥ÁzsÀåPÀëgÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀÄUÀ¼À ¥ÀgÀªÁV ªÀQîgÁzÀ ²æà ¥ÀæPÁ±ï n.ºÉ¨Áâgï gÀªÀgÀÄ ºÁdgÁVzÀÄÝ, ªÀPÁ®vÀÄÛ ¸À°è¹, JgÀqÀÄ ªÁgÀUÀ¼À PÁ¯ÁªÀPÁ±À ¤ÃqÀĪÀAvÉ PÉÆÃjgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.

F ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¢£ÁAPÀ:17.12.2020 gÀAzÀÄ ¨É½UÉÎ 11:00 UÀAmÉUÉ ¤UÀ¢ü¥Àr¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ.

(GªÀiÁ ªÀĺÀzÉêÀ£ï) ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀæzÁs £À PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ðUÀ¼ÀÄ (¥ÀA. gÁeï) UÁæ.C. ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¥ÀA.gÁeï E¯ÁSÉ."

The proceedings were taken up on 17.12.2020 and

the following order was passed:

"¢£ÁAPÀ:17-12-2020.

"D¥Á¢vÀ ZÀÄ£Á¬Äw ¥Àæw¤¢ü: UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw ªÀiÁf G¥ÁzsÀåPÀëgÁzÀ ²æêÀÄw ±ÀĨsÀ, ªÀÄÄvÁÛ£À®ÆègÀÄ UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw, D£ÉÃPÀ¯ï vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀ f¯Éè.

¥ÀæPÀgÀtªÀ£ÀÄß PÀgÉAiÀįÁ¬ÄvÀÄ.

¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀgÀªÁV ²æà J.²æäªÁ¸ÀAiÀÄå, UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð UÉæÃqï-2, ²æà gÀªÉÄñï, »A¢£À ¥ÀA.C.C. ªÀÄÄvÁÛ£À®ÆègÀÄ UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw, D£ÉÃPÀ¯ï vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀ f¯Éè gÀªÀgÀÄ ºÁdjgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.

ªÀiÁf G¥ÁzsÀåPÀëgÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀ ¥ÀgÀªÁV ªÀQîgÀÄ ºÁdjgÀÄvÁÛgÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ °TvÀ ºÉýPÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸À°è¸À®Ä PÁ¯ÁªÀPÁ±À PÉÆÃjzÀÄÝ, F ¢£ÀªÉà °TvÀ ºÉýPÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸À°è¹zÀÄÝ, ¸ÀzÀj ºÉýPÉ ¥ÀæwAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀªÀjUÉ ¤ÃqÀ¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ ªÀÄÄA¢£À «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¢£ÁAPÀ:06.01.2021 gÀAzÀÄ ¨É½UÉÎ 11:00 UÀAmÉUÉ ¤UÀ¢ü¥Àr¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ.

(GªÀiÁ ªÀĺÀzÉêÀ£ï) ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀæzÁs £À PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ðUÀ¼ÀÄ (¥ÀA. gÁeï) UÁæ.C. ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¥ÀA.gÁeï E¯ÁSÉ."

Again on 06.01.2021, 13.01.2021, 28.01.2021 and

15.03.2021, orders passed read as follows:

"¢£ÁAPÀ:06-01-2021.

"D¥Á¢vÀ ZÀÄ£Á¬Äw ¥Àæw¤¢ü: UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw ªÀiÁf G¥ÁzsÀåPÀëgÁzÀ ²æêÀÄw ±ÀĨsÀ, ªÀÄÄvÁÛ£À®ÆègÀÄ UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw, D£ÉÃPÀ¯ï vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀ f¯Éè. ¥ÀæPÀgÀtªÀ£ÀÄß PÀgÉAiÀįÁ¬ÄvÀÄ.

¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀgÀªÁV ²æà J.²æäªÁ¸ÀAiÀÄå, UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð UÉæÃqï-2, ²æà gÀªÉÄñï, »A¢£À ¥ÀA.C.C. ªÀÄÄvÁÛ£À®ÆègÀÄ UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw, D£ÉÃPÀ¯ï vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀ f¯Éè gÀªÀgÀÄ ºÁdjgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.

zÀÆgÀÄzÁgÀgÀ ¥ÀgÀªÁV ªÀQîgÁzÀ PÀĪÀiÁj ¥À«vÀæ J£ï.

gÀªÀgÀÄ ºÁdjgÀÄvÁÛgÉ ºÁUÀÆ ªÀiÁf G¥ÁzsÀåPÀëgÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀ ¥ÀgÀªÁV ²æà JªÀiï. gÀ«PÀĪÀiÁgï, ªÀQîgÀÄ ºÁdjgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.

¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ°è FUÁUÀ¯Éà ¸ÁPÀµÀÄÖ PÁ¯ÁªÀPÁ±ÀªÀ£ÀÄß ¤ÃqÀ¯ÁVzÉ. C®èzÉà ªÀQîgÀÄ CAwªÀÄ ªÁzÀ ªÀÄAr¸À®Ä «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¢£ÁAPÀ:13.01.2021 gÀAzÀÄ ¨É½UÉÎ 11:00 UÀAmÉUÉ ¤UÀ¢ü¥Àr¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ.

(GªÀiÁ ªÀĺÀzÉêÀ£ï) ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀæzÁs £À PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ðUÀ¼ÀÄ (¥ÀA. gÁeï) UÁæ.C. ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¥ÀA.gÁeï E¯ÁSÉ.

¢£ÁAPÀ:13-01-2021.

"JzÀÄgÀÄzÁgÀgÀÄ UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw ªÀiÁf G¥ÁzsÀåPÀëgÁzÀ ²æêÀÄw ±ÀĨsÀ, ªÀiÁf ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀÄUÀ¼ÁzÀ UËgÀªÀÄä ªÀÄvÀÄÛ eÉÆåÃw, ªÀÄÄvÁÛ£À®ÆègÀÄ UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw, D£ÉÃPÀ¯ï vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀ f¯Éè.

¥ÀæPÀgÀtªÀ£ÀÄß PÀgÉAiÀįÁ¬ÄvÀÄ.

¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀgÀªÁV ²æà J.²æäªÁ¸ÀAiÀÄå, UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð UÉæÃqï-2, ²æà gÀªÉÄñï, »A¢£À

¥ÀA.C.C. ªÀÄÄvÁÛ£À®ÆègÀÄ UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw, D£ÉÃPÀ¯ï vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀ f¯Éè gÀªÀgÀÄ ºÁdjgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.

ªÀiÁf G¥ÁzsÀåPÀëgÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀ ¥ÀgÀªÁV ²æà JªÀiï. gÀ«PÀĪÀiÁgï, ªÀQîgÀÄ ºÁdjgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.

«ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ ¸ÀªÀÄAiÀÄzÀ°è ¹.r. AiÀÄ£ÀÄß «ÃQë¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ. ºÁUÀÆ ªÀQîgÀÄ PÉÆÃjgÀĪÀAvÉ PÀ£ÁðlPÀ UÁæªÀÄ ¸ÀégÁeï ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¥ÀAZÁAiÀÄvï gÁeï (wzÀÄÝ¥Àr) C¢ü¤AiÀĪÀÄ 2020 gÀ ¥ÀæwAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¤ÃqÀ®Ä w½¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ.

¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ°è FUÁUÀ¯Éà ¸ÁPÀµÀÄÖ PÁ¯ÁªÀPÁ±ÀªÀ£ÀÄß ¤ÃqÀ¯ÁVzÉ. C®èzÉà ªÀQîgÀÄ CAwªÀÄ ªÁzÀ ªÀÄAr¸À®Ä «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¢£ÁAPÀ:28.01.2021 gÀAzÀÄ ¨É½UÉÎ 11:00 UÀAmÉUÉ ¤UÀ¢ü¥Àr¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ.

(GªÀiÁ ªÀĺÀzÉêÀ£ï) ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀæzÁs £À PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ðUÀ¼ÀÄ (¥ÀA. gÁeï) UÁæ.C. ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¥ÀA.gÁeï E¯ÁSÉ.

¢£ÁAPÀ:28-01-2021.

" JzÀÄgÀÄzÁgÀgÀÄ UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw ªÀiÁf G¥ÁzsÀåPÀëgÁzÀ ²æêÀÄw ±ÀĨsÀ, ªÀiÁf ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀÄUÀ¼ÁzÀ UËgÀªÀÄä ªÀÄvÀÄÛ eÉÆåÃw, ªÀÄÄvÁÛ£À®ÆègÀÄ UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw, D£ÉÃPÀ¯ï vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀ f¯Éè.

¥ÀæPÀgÀtªÀ£ÀÄß PÀgÉAiÀįÁ¬ÄvÀÄ.

¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀgÀªÁV ²æà J.²æäªÁ¸ÀAiÀÄå, UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð UÉæÃqï-2, ²æà gÀªÉÄñï, »A¢£À ¥ÀA.C.C. ªÀÄÄvÁÛ£À®ÆègÀÄ UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw, D£ÉÃPÀ¯ï vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀ f¯Éè gÀªÀgÀÄ ºÁdjgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.

JzÀÄgÀÄzÁgÀgÀ ¥ÀgÀªÁV ªÀQîgÀÄ ºÁdjzÀÄÝ, zÁR¯ÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸ÀPÁðgÀPÉÌ ¸À°è¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ ºÁUÀÆ JzÀÄgÀÄzÁgÀgÀÄ PÉÆÃjgÀĪÀAvÉ ºÉZÀÄѪÀj zÁR¯ÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß MzÀV¸À¯ÁVzÀÄÝ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtªÀ£ÀÄß ¢£ÁAPÀ:10.02.2021 gÀAzÀÄ ªÀÄÄAzÀÆqÀ¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ.

(GªÀiÁ ªÀĺÀzÉêÀ£ï) ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀæzÁs £À PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ðUÀ¼ÀÄ (¥ÀA. gÁeï) UÁæ.C. ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¥ÀA.gÁeï E¯ÁSÉ.

¢£ÁAPÀ:15-03-2021.

" JzÀÄgÀÄzÁgÀgÁzÀ ²æêÀÄw ±ÀĨsÀ, G¥ÁzsÀåPÀëgÀÄ, ²æêÀÄw UËgÀªÀÄä, ¸ÀzÀå¸ÀgÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ ²æêÀÄw eÉÆåÃw, ¸ÀzÀå¸ÀgÀÄ, ªÀÄÄvÁÛ£À®ÆègÀÄ UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw, D£ÉÃPÀ¯ï vÁ®ÆèPÀÄ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀ f¯Éè «gÀÄzÀÞ gÁdå ¸ÀPÁðgÀ. ¥ÀæPÀgÀtªÀ£ÀÄß PÀgÉAiÀįÁ¬ÄvÀÄ.

¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀgÀªÁV ²æà gÀªÉÄñï, C¢üÃPÀëPÀgÀÄ, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ £ÀUÀgÀ f¯Áè ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw, gÀªÀgÀÄ ºÁdgÁVgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.

JzÀÄgÀÄzÁgÀgÀÄ UÉÊgÀÄ ºÁdgÁVgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. F ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ°è «ZÁgÀuÉUÁV ¸ÁPÀµÀÄÖ PÁ¯ÁªÀPÁ±À ¤ÃrgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtªÀ£ÀÄß DzÉñÀPÁÌV PÁ¬ÄÝj¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ.

(GªÀiÁ ªÀĺÀzÉêÀ£ï) ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¥ÀæzÁs £À PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ðUÀ¼ÀÄ (¥ÀA. gÁeï) UÁæ.C. ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¥ÀA.gÁeï E¯ÁSÉ."

A perusal at the orders passed on the aforesaid

dates disclose that there is no proceeding worth the

name taken up by the respondent/Government. If the

note sheet or the order sheet maintained by the

Government is noticed, there is no consideration of the

case of the petitioner as was directed by this Court.

This Court had clearly directed that there should be a

categorical finding as to the nature of misconduct and

that the misconduct so made should be in the light of

the material placed and proof on such misconduct

would become sufficient to pass an order of removal of

the petitioner from the membership of the Panchayat.

Though no opinion was expressed on merits of the

matter, the matter was remitted back to be resumed

from the date 16.01.2019. Paragraph-8 of the said

order clearly indicates that the 1st respondent should

take note of the observations made and record a

categorical finding with regard to the incident which

according to the 1st respondent is a misconduct leading

to passing of the order under Section 43 of the Act. The

inquiry was directed to be concluded within 30 days.

The aforesaid conduct of enquiry has resulted in the

present impugned order. The impugned order narrates

that the proceedings were taken up on several dates

after the disposal of the writ petition. What has

happened on those several dates is extracted

hereinabove. There is no consideration or finding

recorded in the impugned order as was directed by this

Court. This Court had directed a categorical finding to

be rendered on the misconduct of the petitioners therein

one of whom is the present petitioner. Therefore, there

is a clear violation of the order passed by this Court.

5. It is settled principle of law that when

misconduct is alleged and proceedings for removal of

membership is taken up against an elected Member, it

is a serious matter and will have to be dealt with all

caution and not in a casual manner. The Apex Court

while considering removal of elected representatives in

the case of RAVI YASHWANT BHOIR v. COLLECTOR -

(2012) 4 SCC 407 has held as follows:

"29. The Constitution Bench of this Court in G. Sadanandan v. State of Kerala [AIR 1966 SC 1925: 1966 Cri LJ 1533] held that if all the safeguards provided under the statute are not observed, an order having serious consequences is passed without proper application of mind, having a casual approach to the matter, the same can be characterised as having been passed mala fide, and thus, is liable to be quashed.

30. There can also be no quarrel with the settled legal proposition that removal of a duly elected member on the basis of proved misconduct is a quasi-judicial proceeding in nature.

[Vide Indian National Congress (I) v. Institute of Social Welfare [(2002) 5 SCC 685: AIR 2002 SC 2158]. This view stands further fortified by the Constitution Bench judgments of this Court in Bachhitar Singh v. State of Punjab [AIR 1963 SC 395] and Union of India v. H.C. Goel [AIR 1964 SC

364]. Therefore, the principles of natural justice are required to be given full play and strict compliance should be ensured, even in the absence of any provision providing for the same. Principles of natural justice require a fair opportunity of defence to such an elected office- bearer.

31. Undoubtedly, any elected official in local self-government has to be put on a higher pedestal as against a government servant. If a temporary government employee cannot be removed on the ground of misconduct without holding a full- fledged inquiry, it is difficult to imagine how an elected office-bearer can be removed without holding a full-fledged inquiry.

      ...         ...                 ...         ...
Recording of reasons

38. It is a settled proposition of law that even in administrative matters, the reasons should be recorded as it is incumbent upon the authorities to pass a speaking and reasoned order.

... ... ... ...

46. The emphasis on recording reason is that if the decision reveals the "inscrutable face of the sphinx", it can by its silence, render it virtually impossible for the courts to perform their appellate function or exercise the power of judicial review in adjudging the validity of the decision. Right to reason is an indispensable part of a sound judicial system, reasons at least sufficient to indicate an application of mind of the authority before the court. Another rationale is that the affected party can know why the decision has gone against him. One of the salutary requirements of natural justice is spelling out the reasons for the order made, in

other words, a speaking out. The inscrutable face of the sphinx is ordinarily incongruous with a judicial or quasi-judicial performance."

The Apex Court holds that the cases relating to

removal of elected representatives should not be

construed to be removal of any Government servant and

treat it in a casual manner. The Apex Court also holds

that there should be reasons recorded in writing which

would reflect application of mind in the order of such

removal. Both of these factors are given a gobye by the

1st respondent.

6. This Court has rendered a categorical finding

as to what should form the order of removal of Members

or the Panchayat. The order though narrates several

circumstances, there is no finding rendered with regard

to the categorical misconduct that the competent

authority has found, considered and determined as is

necessary in law. What is narrated is the incident and

the reply or objections given by the petitioner.

Therefore, the order dated 04.06.2021 on the face of it

would fall foul of what was directed by this Court and

what is held by the Apex Court.

7. The submission of the learned Additional

Government Advocate that this Court had directed to

view the CD and consider the allegations made in the

CD. The Compact Disc is a video recording of what had

transpired on that date which became the foundation of

allegation of misconduct against the petitioner and

others. Viewing of CD with the petitioner or her counsel

or even the officers of the Government will not absolve

the responsibility of considering and rendering a

categorical finding on each of the misconduct against

the petitioner as was directed by this Court. This Court

had directed an opportunity be given to the petitioners

including viewing of the CD and not the only direction.

Not for nothing this Court rendered its order with

specific direction to act in a particular manner which

cannot be brushed aside, as the aforesaid finding

between the parties has attained finality. The order

impugned without doubt flies on the face of the order

earlier passed and is therefore rendered unsustainable.

8. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

ORDER

(i) The writ petition is allowed in part.

(ii) The order dated 04.06.2021 passed by the

second respondent impugned in the writ

petition stands quashed.

(iii) The matter is remitted back to the hands of

Government to pass appropriate order

strictly in tune with what this Court had

directed while disposing of the earlier

challenge in Writ Petition Nos.32127 of 2019

and connected cases by its order dated

10th February 2020 within 30 days from the

date of receipt of a copy of this order.

(iv) The State is directed to exercise care and

caution while passing the order in the

proceedings now remitted, bearing in mind

the earlier order; the observations made in

the course of this order and not again pass a

perfunctory order without application of

mind.

(v) It is made clear the petitioner would not

participate in any decision having financial

implications except exercising statutory

functions and obligations.

Sd/-

JUDGE

KG