Peetambar Rao vs The State Of Karnataka And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 602 Kant

                                   1



            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                   KALABURAGI BENCH

       DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022

                             PRESENT

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

                                 AND

       THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA


          WRIT APPEAL NO.200190/2021(LB-RES)

BETWEEN:

Peetambar Rao S/o Nagappa Navadagi
Age: 42 years, Occ: Agriculture
R/o: Ganapur, Tq: Chincholi
Dist: Kalaburagi
                                             ... Appellant

(By Sri Shivakumar Kalloor, Advocate)

AND:

1.     The State of Karnataka
       Department of Panchayatraj
       Represented by its Secretary
       Vidhan Soudha, Bangalore-560 001

2.     The Regional Commissioner
       Kalaburagi-585101

3.     The Deputy Commissioner
       Kalaburagi-585101

4.     Bassappa S/o Babanna Hendi
       Age: Major, Occ: President of
       Gram Panchayat Karachkhed
                                      2



       Tq: Chincholi, Dist:Kalaburagi-585307

6.     Chandrashekhar S/o Bellad
       Age: Major, Occ: Agriculture
       R/o: Garagapalli, Tq: Chincholi
       Kalaburagi-585307

7.     Mahadevappa S/o Revansiddappa Patil
       Age::Major, Occ: Agriculture
       R/o: Bedagapalli, Tq: Chincholi
       Dist: Kalaburagi-585307

                                                        ... Respondents

(By Sri Mallikarjun C.Basareddy, HCGP for R1 to R3;
Sri. Ravi B. Patil, Advocate for R4 & R5;
R6 served; Sri. Ganesh Kalaburagi, Advocate for C/R7)

       This Writ Appeal is filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High
Court Act, praying to allow the above writ appeal and set aside the
impugned Judgment and Order dated 18.11.2021 passed by Hon'ble
Single Judge in w.P.No.201004/2018 and also the impugned notification
Annexure-C dated 4.2.2015 in No: Kam/ChuNa/GraPa/67/2014-15 issued
by respondent No.3 and also impugned order Annexure-J dated 7.2.2018
issued by respondent No.2 in No: Kam/PraAaGu/JiPam/331/2014-15.

       This appeal coming on for Admission this day, S.R.Krishna
Kumar J., delivered the following:


                             JUDGMENT

This appeal by the unsuccessful writ petitioner in WP

No.201004/2018 is directed against the impugned order dated

18.11.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the

said petition filed by the appellant was dismissed by the

learned Single Judge.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant,

learned counsel for respondent Nos.4, 5 and 7 and the

learned HCGP and perused the material on record.

3. The material on record indicates that the

appellant herein preferred the aforesaid petition aggrieved by

the notification dated 04.02.2015 passed by the Deputy

Commissioner as well as subsequent impugned order dated

07.02.2018 passed by the Regional Commissioner whereby

their village Ganapur was included in Garagapalli Gram

Panchayat by excluding/removing the same from Karachkhed

Gram Panchayat in which it was included earlier. It was the

grievance of the petitioner that despite the earlier round of

litigation in WP No.202613/2015 and connected matters

disposed of on 28.06.2017 as well as other material on record

which clearly indicate that the subject village Ganapur

deserves to be included in Karachkhed Gram Panchayat as

notified earlier and not under Garagapalli Gram Panchayat,

the Regional Commissioner has erroneously proceeded to

pass the impugned order rejecting the objection/claim of the

appellant for inclusion of the said village Ganapur in

Karachkhed Gram Panchayat instead of Garagapalli Gram

Panchayat as shown in the impugned notification.

4. After hearing the parties, the learned Single

Judge came to the conclusion that the material on record, in

particular, the impugned notification and the impugned order

passed by the Regional Commissioner do not fall within the

parameters for interference in such matters as held by the

Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of B. N. Shankarappa v.

Uthanur Srinivas and Others reported in AIR 1992 Supreme

Court 836, which was followed by this Court in the case of

Shivaji and others v. State of Karnataka and Others

reported in 2016 (3) Kar.L.J. 44 and consequently

inclusion/exclusion of a particular village from the jurisdiction

of particular Gram Panchayat was in the realm of discretion

conferred upon the authorities and in the absence of any

material to establish that the said notification/decision was

exercised in an arbitrary or whimsical manner and without

proper application of mind, this Court would not ordinarily

exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India. Under these circumstances, the learned

Single Judge proceeded to pass the impugned order rejecting

the said petition, aggrieved by which the appellant is before

this Court by way of the present appeal.

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties

and upon re-evaluation and reconsideration of the entire

material on record and perusal of the impugned order passed

by the learned Single Judge, who has come to the categorical

conclusion that the instant matter does not warrant exercise of

power by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India to interfere with the impugned decision/order in the

absence of any material to show that the said decision/order

was passed in an arbitrary or whimsical manner and without

proper application of mind or for ulterior or malafide purposes,

we do not find any infirmity or illegality in the order passed by

the learned Single Judge warranting interference by this Court

in the present appeal. In this context, it is necessary to state

that a perusal of the notification including the subject village

Ganapur under Garagapalli Gram Panchayat is based on the

population of the said villages as well as total number of seats

allocated for the purpose of holding Gram Panchayat elections

and the exclusion of Ganapur village from Karachkhed Gram

Panchayat is also based on the population and the total

number of seats allocated for the purpose of election based on

proper study and census conducted by the authorities which

undoubtedly have the power to modify and vary the earlier

notification keeping in mind the status of the village, its

population and other circumstances, etc., at the time of issuing

the said notification. Keeping in mind all relevant factors

necessary for the purpose of issuing notification, the Deputy

Commissioner has issued the impugned notification which

was confirmed by the Regional Commissioner as well as the

learned Single Judge, who have correctly overruled the only

objection urged by the appellant that there was a river in

between Ganapur and Karachkhed which cannot be termed

as relevant or material factor for the purpose of excluding

Ganapur village from Garagpalli Gram Panchayat jurisdiction

under the provisions of Karnataka Gram Swaraj and

Panchayat Raj Act, 1993.

6. In view of the foregoing reasons, we do not find

any merit in the appeal and the same is hereby dismissed.

However, having regard to the fact that the impugned

notification issued by the Deputy Commissioner is of the year

2015 and the present Writ Appeal is disposed of today i.e., on

13.01.2022, liberty is reserved in favour of the appellant to

submit one more representation to the authorities ventilating

his grievance; if such a representation is submitted by the

appellant, the authorities shall consider the same and proceed

to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law without

being influenced by the findings and observations recorded

either in the impugned notification dated 04.02.2015 or the

impugned order dated 07.02.2018 or the impugned order of

the learned Single Judge or the present order of this Court.

In view of dismissal of the appeal, I.A.3/2021 for stay

does not survive for consideration and the same is accordingly

dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

NSP/LG