Karnataka High Court
Smt Sumitra vs The State Of Karnataka And Ors on 16 January, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:247
WP No. 200133 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.NATARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO.200133 OF 2025 (LB-ELE)
BETWEEN:
SMT. SUMITRA
W/O PRAKASH CHAWAN,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC: PRESIDENT,
GRAM PANCHYATH TENGLI VILLAGE,
R/O TENGLI TQ. KALAGI DIST. KALABURAGI-585317.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. R.S. KADGANCHI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYAT RAJ,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
Digitally signed
by SACHIN M.S. BUILDING BENGLAURU-560001.
Location: High
Court Of 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
Karnataka
KALABURAGI-585101.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
KALABURAGI-585101.
4. GRAM PANCHAYAT TENGLI,
REPRESENTED BY ITS,
PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
TQ. KALAGI AND DIST. KALABURAGI-585317.
5. SRI. VIJAYKUMAR,
S/O REVANSIDDAPPA,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:247
WP No. 200133 of 2025
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC: MEMBER,
AND UPADYAKSHA OF GRAM PANCHAYATH TENGLI
VILLAGE,
TQ. KALAGI DIST. KALABURAGI-585317.
6. SRI. DESU S/O CHANDU,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC: MEMBER,
GRAM PANCHAYAT TENGLI,
TQ. KALAGI AND DIST. KALABURAGI-5585317
7. SMT. KASHIBAI W/O SHIVAJI,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC: MEMBER,
GRAM PANCHAYAT TENGLI,
TQ. KALAGI AND DIST. KALABURAGI-585317
8. SMT. GUNDABAI W/O SANTOSH,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCC: MEMBER,
GRAM PANCHAYAT TENGLI,
TQ. KALAGI AND DIST. KALABURAGI-585317
9. SMT. JYOTHI W/O SHARNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCC: MEMBER,
GRAM PANCHAYAT TENGLI,
TQ. KALAGI AND DIST. KALABURAGI-585317
10. SRI. BHIMASHANKAR
S/O SHARASHCHANDRA,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC: MEMBER,
GRAM PANCHAYAT TENGLI,
TQ. KALAGI AND DIST. KALABURAGI-585317
11. SMT. VIJAYALAXMI
W/O HANAMANTHARAYA,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCC: MEMBER,
GRAM PANCHAYAT TENGLI,
TQ. KALAGI AND DIST. KALABURAGI-585317
12. SMT. JAGADEVI
W/O AMRUTH,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC: MEMBER,
GRAM PANCHAYAT TENGLI,
TQ. KALAGI AND DIST. KALABURAGI-585317.
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:247
WP No. 200133 of 2025
13. MD MUSTAFAT MD GOUS,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC: MEMBER,
GRAM PANCHAYAT TENGLI,
TQ. KALAGI AND DIST. KALABURAGI-585317
14. SMT. GORIBI W/O DADAMIYYA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC: MEMBER,
GRAM PANCHAYAT TENGLI,
TQ. KALAGI AND DIST. KALABURAGI-585317
15. SRI. LAXMAN S/O MANASINGH,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC: MEMBER
GRAM PANCHAYAT TENGLI,
TQ. KALAGI AND DIST. KALABURAGI-585317.
16. MAIBOOBA PATEL
S/O MAQBOOLA PATEL,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC: MEMBER,
GRAM PANCHAYAT TENGLI,
TQ. KALAGI AND DIST. KALABURAGI-585317.
17. SRI. NAGARAJ
S/O REVANASIDDAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, OCC: MEMBER,
GRAM PANCHAYAT TENGLI,
TQ, KALAGI AND DIST. KALABURAGI-585317.
18. SMT. SAVITA
W/O RAJASHEKHAR,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC: MEMBER,
GRAM PANCHAYAT TENGLI,
TQ. KALAGI AND DIST. KALABURAGI-585317
19. SMT. SRIDEVI
W/O RAVINDRA,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC: MEMBER,
GRAM PANCHAYAT TENGLI,
TQ. KALAGI AND DIST. KALABURAGI-585317
20. SRI. HANAMANTHARAYA
S/O NINSASHETTY,
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:247
WP No. 200133 of 2025
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC: MEMBER
GRAM PANCHAYAT TENGLI,
TQ. KALAGI AND DIST. KALABURAGI-585317
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN SAHUKAR, AGA R1 TO R3;
SRI. RAVI B. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI AMRESH RAVOOR, AND
SRI GANESH NAIK, ADVOCATES FOR C/R5, R10 AND R19)
THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A
WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTION TO
QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE IN NO.
SAM/KAM/CHUNVANE/81/2024-25 DATED 30-12-2024 ISSUED
BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT, THE COPY OF WHICH HAS BEEN
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.NATARAJ
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner has challenged a notice dated 30.12.2024
issued by the respondent No.3 proposing to hold a meeting of
the members of the panchayat to consider the request for no
confidence motion on 20.01.2025.
2. The facts in brief are that the petitioner is the
president of the panchayat of Tengali Gram Panchayat. The
members of the panchayat submitted a representation under
Rule 3(1) of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Motion of no
NC: 2025:KHC-K:247
confidence against Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Gram
Panchyath) Rules 1994 (for short "the Rules, 1994"),
expressing 'No Confidence' in the petitioner to continue as
President. The respondent No.3 issued a notice dated
30.12.2024 proposing to hold the meeting of the members on
20.01.2025 to consider the motion of no confidence. The
petitioner being aggrieved by the said notice is before this
Court.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that
under Section 3(2) of the Rules, 1994, the respondent No.3 is
bound to convene a meeting for the consideration of the motion
of no confidence, which shall not be later than 30 days from the
date on which receives the notice under sub-rule (1). He
submits that the notice of the sub-rule (1) was submitted by
the members of the panchayat on 20.12.2024 and therefore,
the meeting must have been held before 20.01.2025.
However, the meeting is schedule to be held on 20.01.2025.
He contends that if a thing that has to be done in a particular
manner it has to be done in that manner alone or not at all.
Thus, he contends that the impugned notice issued is in
NC: 2025:KHC-K:247
violation of Rule 3(2) of the Rules, 1994 and the same deserves
to be set aside.
4. Learned Additional Government Advocate did not
dispute the facts that the notice under Rule 3(1) of the Rules,
1994 was received by the respondent No.4 (respondent Nos.5-
20) on 20.12.2024 and therefore, the meeting ought to have
been conducted by or before the 18.01.2025.
5. The question whether the procedure prescribed
under Rule 3(2) of the Rules, 1994 is directory or mandatory is
no longer res-integra in view of the judgment of a Division
Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.5159-60/1998, where it was
held that the duty to hold a meeting not later than 30 days
from the date of receipt of Form No.1 is mandatory.
6. In that view of the matter, the impugned notice
issued by the respondent No.3 falls foul of Rule 3(2) of the
Rules, 1994. Hence, the impugned notice dated 30.12.2024
issued to the petitioner proposing to hold a meeting to consider
the motion of no confidence on 21.01.2025 is quashed.
7. It is however open for the members of the
panchayat to take out proceedings in accordance with law.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:247
8. The respondent No.3, seems to be ignorant of the
procedure to be followed under the provisions of the K.P.R
(Motion of no confidence against Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha
of Gram Panchyath) Rules 1994. It is sad that the respondent
No.3 has expended administrative machinery and expenses for
the proposed meeting, which is in violation Rule 3 (2) of the
Rules, 1994. Therefore, it is appropriate to direct the
respondent No.2 to initiate suitable action against the
respondent No.3 and to recover all expenses incurred for the
purpose of holding a meeting of the members of the panchayat
on 21.01.2025.
Sd/-
(R.NATARAJ)
JUDGE
AMM
CT:SI
