Karnataka High Court
Chaya W/O Mallikarjun Naikal vs The State Of Karnataka And Ors on 6 July, 2022
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
1 W.P.No.201591/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF JULY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT PETITION No.201591/2022 (LB-ELE)
BETWEEN:
Smt. Chaya W/o Mallikarjun Naikal,
Age: 40 years, Occ: President of Gram
Panchayat Naikal, R/o Naikal Village,
Tq: Wadagera, Dist: Yadgir.
... Petitioner
(By Sri. Rajesh Doddamani, Advocate)
AND:
1. The State of Karnataka,
Represented by its Secretary,
Dept. of Rural Development and
Panchayatraj, Vikas Soudha,
Bengaluru-01.
2. The Assistant Commissioner,
Yadgir Sub-division,
Taluk: Wadagera, Dist: Yadgir-585310.
3. The Gram Panchayat Naikal,
Naikal Village Wadagera Taluk,
Dist: Yadgir-585319.
Represented by its
2 W.P.No.201591/2022
Panchayat Development Officer.
4. Sri. Khaja Moinoddin S/o Badesab,
Age: Major, Occ: Member,
Grama Panchayat Naikal,
R/o Naikal Village,
Tq: Wadagera, Dist: Yadgir-585319.
5. Smt. Maremma W/o Basavaraj,
Age: Major, Occ: Member,
Grama Panchayat Naikal,
R/o Naikal Village, TQ: Wadagera,
Dist: Yadgir-585319.
6. Sri. Dawood S/o Mashaqsab,
Age: Major, Occ: Member,
Grama Panchayat Naikal,
R/o Naikal Village,
Tq: Wadagera, Dist: Yadgir-585319.
7. Smt. Hanamawwa W/o Ratnappa,
Age: Major, Occ: Member,
Grama Panchayat Naikal,
R/o Naikal Village,
Tq: Wadagera, Dist: Yadgir-585319.
8. Sri. Bhimaraya S/o Ramanna,
Age: Major, Occ: Member,
Grama Panchayat Naikal,
R/o Naikal Village, Tq: Wadagera,
Dist: Yadgir-585219.
9. Sri. Mohamma Moula S/o Mohammad Ali,
Age: Major, Occ: Member,
Grama Panchayat Naikal,
R/o Naikal Village,
3 W.P.No.201591/2022
Tq: Wadagera, Dist: Yadgir-585319.
10. Smt. Abbasabee W/o Khajasab,
Age: Major, Occ: Member,
Grama Panchayat Naikal,
R/o Naikal Village-585319.
Tq: Wadagera, Dist: Yadgir.
11. Smt. Yallamma W/o Monappa,
Age: Major, Occ: Member,
Grama Panchayat Naikal,
R/o Naikal Village,
Tq: Wadagera, Dist: Yadgir-585319.
12. Smt. Lakshmi W/o Eshappa,
Age: Major, Occ: Member,
Grama Panchayat Naikal,
R/o Naikal Village,
Tq: Wadagera, Dist: Yadgir-585319.
13. Smt. Abedabee W/o Khajahussain,
Age: Major, Occ: Member,
Grama Panchayat Naikal,
R/o Naikal Village,
Tq: Wadagera, Dist: Yadgir-585319.
14. Sri. Bhemappa S/o Chandappa,
Age: Major, Occ: Member,
Grama Panchayat Naikal,
R/o Naikal Village,
Tq: Wadagera, Dist: Yadgir-585319.
15. Smt. Saheb Bee W/o Ismail,
Age: Major, Occ: Member,
Grama Panchayat Naikal,
R/o Naikal Village,
4 W.P.No.201591/2022
Tq: Wadagera, Dist: Yadgir-585319.
16. Smt. Mallamma W/o Chandrashekar,
Age: Major, Occ: Member,
Grama Panchayat Naikal,
R/o Naikal Village,
Tq: Wadagera, Dist: Yadgir-585319.
17. Sri. Sharanappa S/o Mareppa,
Age: Major, Occ: Member,
Grama Panchayat Naikal,
R/o Naikal Village,
Tq: Wadagera, Dist: Yadgir-585319.
18. Sri. Mallayya S/o Yamunayya,
Age: Major, Occ: Member,
Grama Panchayat Naikal,
R/o Naikal Village,
Tq: Wadagera, Dist: Yadgir-585319.
19. Smt. Mahalakshmi W/o Bheemaraya,
Age: Major, Occ: Member,
Grama Panchayat Naikal,
R/o Naikal Village,
Tq: Wadagera, Dist: Yadgir-585319.
... Respondents
(By Sri. Sharanabasappa M.Patil, HCGP for R1 & R2;
By Sri. Ganesh Naik, Sri. S.P.Nadekar and
Sri. S.S.Hiremath, Advocates for R5 & R14)
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and
227 of the Constitution of India, praying to allow this
writ petition by issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari
by quashing the No confidence Meeting Notice against
the Adhyaksha of Naikal Gram Panchayat i.e. petitioner
5 W.P.No.201591/2022
scheduled on 11.07.2022 issued by respondent No.2
vide 22.06.2022 which is at Annexure-F; and to allow
this writ petition by issuing a mandamus by directing the
respondent No.2 to consider the representation of the
petitioner dated 01.07.2022 which is at Annexure-G and
etc.
This petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing this
day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
The petitioner, who is the President of Naikal Gram
Panchayat has preferred this writ petition with a prayer
to quash the meeting notice vide Annexure-F dated
22.06.2022 issued by the second respondent under Rule
3(2) of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Motion of No
Confidence against Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of
Gram Panchayat) Rules, 1994 (for short 'the Rules,
1994').
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned counsel appearing for the private
respondents.
3. Brief facts of the case, which are relevant for
the purpose of disposal of this writ petition are that the
petitioner was elected as an Adhyaksha of Naikal Gram
Panchayat in the election that was held on 05.02.2021.
It appears that the private respondents herein have
moved a requisition as provided under Rule 3(1) of the
Rules, 1994 before the second respondent - Assistant
Commissioner to fix the date of meeting for the purpose
of moving no confidence motion against Adhyaksha of
Naikal Gram Panchayat. After receipt of the said
requisition, the second respondent had issued the
impugned meeting notice dated 22.06.2022 as provided
under Rule 3(2) of the Rules, 1994. Being aggrieved by
the same, the petitioner is before this Court.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that the proceedings for disqualifying respondent Nos.9,
13 and 15 from the membership of Naikal Gram
Panchayat is pending consideration before the
competent authority and therefore, on the basis of their
requisition, the second respondent - Assistant
Commissioner could not have issued the impugned
meeting notice. He also submits that the requisition had
been signed by the spouses of certain members and
therefore, the requisition cannot be said to be in
accordance with Rule 3(1) of the Rules, 1994.
5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the private respondents submits that the writ
petition cannot be maintained by the petitioner, who is
an Adhyaksha of Naikal Gram Panchayat, as against
whom, no confidence motion sought to be moved in
view of the judgment of this Court in the case of Abdul
Razak vs. Assistant Commissioner, Davangere
reported in 2005(1) Kar.L.J 230. He also submits that
if any member is disqualified prior to holding the
meeting, he will not be in a position to attend the
meeting and therefore, that cannot be a ground for
interfering with the impugned meeting notice.
6. A coordinate Bench of this Court in the case
of Abdul Razak (Supra) has held that the writ petition
filed by the Adhyaksha challenging the notice under Rule
3(2) of the Rules, 1994 cannot be maintained and he
has no locus-standi to challenge the notice and any
illegality in the notice need not be interfered with at the
instance of the Adhyaksha. Further, as rightly
contended by the learned counsel appearing for the
private respondents that in the event of any one of the
elected member of the Gram Panchayat suffers
disqualification before the date of meeting fixed under
Annexure-F, it is needless to state that the said member
cannot participate in the proposed meeting. Therefore,
on the said ground, meeting notice cannot be quashed.
Further, the contention of the petitioner that the
requisition had not been signed by the member but it
has been signed by the spouses of certain members, is
not based on any evidence and therefore, on that
ground, no relief can be granted to the petitioner.
Under the circumstances, I find no merit in this writ
petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
The learned High Court Government Pleader is
permitted to file his memo of appearance within two
weeks.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Srt
CT-SMP
