Karnataka High Court
Veena W/O Satappa Bhoovi vs The State Of Karnataka on 23 July, 2025
Author: R.Devdas
Bench: R.Devdas
-1-
W.A. No. 100259/2025 c/w
W.A. No. 100260/2025 (LB-ELE)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 23rd DAY OF JULY, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS
®
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K V ARAVIND
WRIT APPEAL NO.100259 OF 2025 (LB-ELE) C/W
WRIT APPEAL NO.100260 OF 2025 (LB-ELE)
IN WRIT APPEAL NO.100259 OF 2025:
BETWEEN:
ALTAF KHARORI MOHIDDIN,
S/O MOHAMMED NOORULLAH KHAROORI,
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC.: VICE-PRESIDENT,
BHATKAL TMC, R/O. KIDWAI ROAD CROSS,
BHATKAL, TQ. BHATKAL,
DIST. UTTARA KANNADA-581320.
- APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SANTOSH B. MALLIGAWAD, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
R/BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
MOHANKUMAR
VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-01.
B SHELAR
Digitally signed by
MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR
Location: High Court of
Karnataka, Dharwad Bench
Date: 2025.07.25 10:26:19
+0530 2. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR,
DISTRICT URBAN DEVELOPMENT CELL,
UTTARA KANNADA-581320.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT-581320.
4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
BHATKAL-581320.
5. THE TOWN MUNCIPAL COUNCIL
R/BY ITS CHIEF-OFFICER, BHATKAL,
DIST. UTTARA KANNADA-581320.
-2-
W.A. No. 100259/2025 c/w
W.A. No. 100260/2025 (LB-ELE)
6. THE TAHASILDAR,
BHATKAL-581320.
- RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. GANGADHAR J.M,
ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL
FOR SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY,
ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE
FOR R1 TO R4 AND R6;
SRI. SANTOSH B. MANE, ADVOCATE FOR R5)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P. NO.
107601/2024 DATED 09/04/2025 AND ISSUE A WRIT IN THE
NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE NOTIFICATION DATED
16.12.2024 BEARING NO.Sta/Sanchu/Wahi/01/2024-25 PASSED BY
RESPONDENT NO.3 VIDE ANNEXURE-F & ETC.
IN WRIT APPEAL NO.100260 OF 2025:
BETWEEN:
VEENA W/O SATAPPA BHOOVI, AGE: 52 YEARS,
OCC.: MEMBER ANNIGERI, TMC,
R/O. WARD NO.20, TQ. ANNIGERI,
DIST. DHARWAD DISTRICT.
- APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SANTOSH B. MALLIGAWAD, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-01.
2. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR,
DISTRICT URBAN DEVELOPMENT CELL,
DHARWAD-580001.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
DHARWAD DISTRICT-580001.
-3-
W.A. No. 100259/2025 c/w
W.A. No. 100260/2025 (LB-ELE)
4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
DHARWAD-580001.
5. THE TOWN MUNCIPAL COUNCIL
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER,
ANNIGERI, DIST. DHARWAD-582201.
6. THE TAHASILDAR,
ANNIGERI-582201.
7. SHIVANAND YALLAPPA BELAHAR
AGE. 49 YEARS, OCC. COUNCILLORS,
R/O ANNIGERI TOWN,
DIST. DHARWAD-582201.
- RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. GANGADHAR J.M,
ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL
FOR SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY,
ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE
FOR R1 TO R4 AND R6;
SRI. MRUTYUNJAY PUJAR, ADVOCATE FOR R5;
SRI. SRINIVAS B. NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR R7)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P. NO.
107977/2024 DATED 09.04.2025 AND ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE
OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE NOTIFICATION DATED 16.12.2024
BEARING NO.Sta/Sanchu/Wahi/01/2024-25 PASSED BY
RESPONDENT NO.3 VIDE ANNEXURE-F & ETC.
THESE WRIT APPEALS, HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED
ON 30.06.2025, COMING ON FOR 'PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT',
THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K V ARAVIND
-4-
W.A. No. 100259/2025 c/w
W.A. No. 100260/2025 (LB-ELE)
CAV JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS)
These intra Court appeals are filed by the original
writ petitioners, assailing the impugned order passed by
the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 107977/2024 and
W.P. No. 107601/2024, dated 09.04.2025.
2. The writ petitions were filed by the two petitioners
who were elected as members of Bhatkal Town Municipal
Council and Annigeri Town Municipal Council. Their
grievance, in common, was that although the posts of the
President of the respective Municipal Councils were
reserved for SC (Woman) candidate in Bhatkal and ST
(Woman) candidate in Annigeri, however, since no such
candidate was available, the respective Deputy
Commissioners issued notifications changing the
reservation to SC candidate in Bhatkal and ST candidate in
Annigeri.
3. Although the prayers in both the writ petitions were
to quash the impugned notifications passed by the
respective Deputy Commissioners, nevertheless it was
W.A. No. 100259/2025 c/w
W.A. No. 100260/2025 (LB-ELE)
argued before the learned Single Judge that the
reservation of the post of President should be modified to
accommodate Backward Classes candidates. Before this
Court too, the learned counsel for the appellants had
initially contended that if change could be made in favour
of SC candidate and ST candidate respectively, it could
also be done in favour of a candidate belonging to
Backward Classes, since earlier the post was never
reserved for Backward Classes. This submission was
putforth, both before the learned Single Judge and before
this Court, on the ground that rotation is mandated by the
provisions of the Constitution of India as well as the
provisions of the Act and the Rules. However, when this
Court expressed its prima facie opinion that such a
contention would militate the express provisions of the
Constitution of India and the provisions of the Act and the
Rules, the learned counsel submitted that if there was no
other alternative, then the posts should be kept vacant.
W.A. No. 100259/2025 c/w
W.A. No. 100260/2025 (LB-ELE)
4. We find from the impugned order that the learned
Single Judge formulated the following points for
consideration:
1) Whether the reservation for a particular category
can be changed due to non availability of a person of
that particular category more so as regards women's
category by deleting the reservation for the women
category and continuing the reservation for the very
same category that is ST or SC? In other words, can
a reservation for ST (W) be changed to ST and
reservation for SC (W) be changed to SC without
impinging on the reservation methodology?
2) Whether the non availability of a candidate as
regards the category for which the post has been
reserved would require the said post to be kept
vacant?
5. Learned Additional Advocate General Sri
J.M.Gangadhar has submitted that what was challenged in
the writ petitions was the notification issued by the
respective Deputy Commissioners, however, it was
W.A. No. 100259/2025 c/w
W.A. No. 100260/2025 (LB-ELE)
brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge that
subsequently the State Government issued a notification
dated 10.02.2025 modifying the earlier notification dated
05.08.2024, making relevant changes to the reservation of
the post of the President in Annigeri TMC and Bhatkal
CMC, including three other Municipalities. In that view of
the matter, the learned Additional Advocate General
submitted that the appellants cannot contend that by an
executive order the reservations have been modified.
6. Learned Additional Advocate General has also
placed reliance on a decision of a Coordinate Bench of this
Court in the case of M.G.Achappa Vs. The Prescribed
Officer1 where it was held that Sec. 21 of the Karnataka
General Clauses Act, 1899 embodies a rule of construction
where mistakes if any, in a notification, can be rectified by
issuance of appropriate orders in exercise of the powers
vested in the authority. It was pointed out that similar
modification made to the reservation had fallen for
consideration in the said case. The Coordinate Bench
1996 (5) Kar.L.J. 555 (DB)
W.A. No. 100259/2025 c/w
W.A. No. 100260/2025 (LB-ELE)
based its decision on a judgment of the Apex Court in the
case of Mohammad Yunus Salim Vs. Sri Kumar
Shastry & Others2. The learned AAG also placed reliance
on a decision of a Division Bench of the High Court of
Rajasthan in the case of Mansingh & Ors Vs State of
Rajasthan & Ors.3 where it was held that the power to
issue a notification includes the power to rescind, vary,
modify or amend a notification. In the absence of any
provision in the Act or the Rules empowering the authority
to vary or rescind the order made under the Rules, the
provisions of the General Clauses Act can be pressed into
operation if the circumstances so necessitate, but,
however the procedural formalities have to be followed
and it cannot be circumvented. Challenge raised to similar
modification in the notification of reservation was negated
at the hands of the Division Bench.
7. Learned Additional Advocate General would further
submit that having regard to the peculiar facts and
circumstances of these cases, where the category for
(1974) 4 SCC 854
1995 SCC OnLine Raj. 10
W.A. No. 100259/2025 c/w
W.A. No. 100260/2025 (LB-ELE)
which the reservation of the posts of President was made
and non availability of such a candidate of the category,
the competent authority is required to act, to remove the
difficulty and ensure proper working of the council of the
municipality, with the barest minimum breach of the
provision of law, while ensuring compliance of the
constitutional provisions regarding reservation and
rotation. Learned Additional Advocate General submitted
that the appellants sought for change from Schedule Tribe
and Scheduled Caste category to Backward Classes
category, which would be in violation of the constitutional
provisions, but are not prepared to accept a lesser breach
namely, reassignment of the reservation in the same
category. It is also submitted that the learned Single
Judge rightly concluded that the Court cannot express its
helplessness and allow ineffective functioning of the
Municipal Council and therefore, in the peculiar
circumstances of the case, the change was permitted in
the reservation in the same category.
- 10 -
W.A. No. 100259/2025 c/w
W.A. No. 100260/2025 (LB-ELE)
8. Learned counsel for the appellants vehemently
contended that by issuing the impugned notification the
competent authority has clearly breached the
constitutional provision of reservation and rotation. It is
submitted that by issuance of the impugned notification, a
seat reserved for ST (Woman) and SC (Woman) are now
sought to be filled by an ST male candidate and SC male
candidate and therefore there is a clear violation of the
constitutional provision and statutory provision, reducing
the number of seats reserved for women candidates.
9. Further, in order to buttress his contention that the
post of President should be kept unfilled or vacant, learned
counsel for the appellants submitted that sufficient
provision is made in the Karnataka Municipalities Act,
1964, to meet such exigencies of the council having no
President to head the meetings. It is pointed out to
Sec.44 (2) (a) of the Act which enables the Vice President,
in the absence of the President to preside over the
meetings of the Municipal Council. The Vice President
while officiating as the President can exercise the same
- 11 -
W.A. No. 100259/2025 c/w
W.A. No. 100260/2025 (LB-ELE)
authority as is vested in the President. In that view of the
matter, it is submitted that the respondent-authorities and
the State cannot be permitted to change the reservation
which was provided in accordance with law.
10. Heard learned counsel Sri Santoshkumar B.
Malligawad, for the appellants, learned Additional
Advocate General Sri J.M.Gangadhar, for the respondent-
State and its authorities and perused the petition papers.
11. It is noticeable that earlier when a notification was
issued, providing for reservation to the posts of President
and Vice President of the Municipal Councils and Town
Panchayats, on 10.05.2022 the notification was challenged
before this Court. The matter went upto the Apex Court in
Civil Leave to Appeal (C) Nos.7090/2021. The Hon'ble
Supreme Court, by order dated 10.05.2022 considered the
affidavit filed by the Secretary to Government, Urban
Development Department dated 09.05.2022, pertaining to
the earlier directions issued by the Supreme Court
entrusting the task of preparing a software for the purpose
- 12 -
W.A. No. 100259/2025 c/w
W.A. No. 100260/2025 (LB-ELE)
of rotation in reservation, to the hands of the National
Informatics Centre (NIC).
12. Pursuant to a software being prepared by the NIC,
the Apex Court prescribed various steps to be followed for
providing rotation to the reservation, including a direction
to the Government to provide to NIC the quantum of
reservation contemplated in Rule 13(1) of the Karnataka
Municipalities (President & Vice President) Election Rules,
1965; the total number of offices of the President and Vice
President, the number of reservation to be provided to the
Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and the Backward
Classes; the sequence of earlier reservation made to the
offices of the President and Vice President; that the cycle
of rotation shall commence from the first turn, after first
ordinary election held after 01.06.1994, etc. The Apex
Court placed on record the broad agreement at the hands
of the parties before the Court and the State Government
that the steps are in conformity with the procedure to be
followed under the relevant provisions of the Act and the
Rules.
- 13 -
W.A. No. 100259/2025 c/w
W.A. No. 100260/2025 (LB-ELE)
13. Accordingly the Apex Court permitted the State
Government to proceed further in the matter and ensure
that the software is made ready within five weeks as
assured by NIC. Pursuant to the software prepared at the
hands of the NIC, subsequent notification dated
05.08.2024 was issued by the Government, providing for
the reservation to the posts of President and Vice
President of various Municipal Councils and Town
Panchayats.
14. What is noticeable is that the subsequent
notification dated 05.08.2024 which provided for
reservation for the posts of the President of the Town
Municipal Council, Bhatkal to SC (W) and the President of
Town Municipal Council, Annigeri to ST (W) were not
objected to the same remained unchallenged. It is equally
important to notice 'Step-4' which was directed by the
Apex Court in its order dated 10.05.2022, which reads as
follows:
"Step-4: Despite following the above mentioned
steps, if the software either encounters a repetition
- 14 -
W.A. No. 100259/2025 c/w
W.A. No. 100260/2025 (LB-ELE)
or exceeds the quantum of reservation or finds the
final outcome to be in breach of Section-42(A), such
residual offices shall be interchanged with general
category or any other category without affecting the
principle of rotation with minimum repetition. The
proceedings (foot notes) shall be drawn indicating
reasons for such interchanges."
15. It is evident that the Hon'ble Supreme Court
foresaw practical difficulties in the matter of rotation of
reservation. It was therefore directed that when the
computerized process throws up the results or the manner
in which the reservation to the posts of President and Vice
President are to be rotated and such results, if
implemented, would be in breach of the provisions of law,
then such residual offices shall be interchanged with
general category or any other category, with minimum
repetition. We can see that the Hon'ble Supreme Court
prescribed 'play in the joint' in order to remove the
difficulties, with the barest minimum breach of the
provisions of the law and the Rules. Such directions have
- 15 -
W.A. No. 100259/2025 c/w
W.A. No. 100260/2025 (LB-ELE)
been issued earlier too by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the
matter of providing reservation and rotation to the posts
of the local bodies, be it at the panchayats, municipalities
or Municipal Corporations. This is because mathematical
precision is not possible and strict adherence to the Rule
may give undesirable or absurd results, as the case on
hand.
16. We are faced with a situation where there are no
elected Councillors in the prescribed category, namely, SC
(W) and ST (W). In fact such a situation is encountered in
five municipalities. However, the elected Councillors in the
other three municipalities did not raise any objection for
the subsequent changes made by the competent authority
/ State Government and therefore the elections have been
held in those three municipalities, along with all the other
municipalities in the State.
17. In that view of the matter, we do not agree with
the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants
that the posts have to be kept vacant, instead of altering
the reservations. We are also of the considered opinion
- 16 -
W.A. No. 100259/2025 c/w
W.A. No. 100260/2025 (LB-ELE)
that such a suggestion will not be in the interest of the
citizens of the Municipality and such an act will not be in
consonance with democratic principles.
18. The learned Single Judge has issued certain general
directions, more particularly direction No. 11.3 which
reads as follows:
11.3. Thus, it would be required for the
respondents to capture the data pertaining to
the persons who have been elected to the
Municipal Council and then tabulate the
reservation for the post of President and Vice
President, taking into consideration the presence
of the candidates belonging to that particular
category. If that is done and if the reservation
for a particular post is made and no candidate is
found for that category, then suitable changes
could be made at that time so as to avoid this
kind of eventuality."
19. These directions are akin to 'Step No.4' which was
directed by the Hon'ble Apex Court. We are in agreement
- 17 -
W.A. No. 100259/2025 c/w
W.A. No. 100260/2025 (LB-ELE)
with the suggestion made by the learned Single Judge.
However we also direct the respondent-State Government
and its authorities to take note of the directions issued by
the Apex Court in 'Step No. 4'. When such difficulties are
encountered, despite the computerized process throwing
up certain results, as found in the present case,
proceedings shall be drawn by the competent authority
indicating reasons for such interchanges and thereafter the
notification shall be issued. This would mean that before
final notifications of reservations are published, the
competent authority should look into the list of elected
Councillors and find out whether there are elected
Councillors in the category of reservation. If there are no
elected Councillors of the particular category, then the
next step as prescribed hereinabove should be undertaken
by the competent authority.
20. Before parting, we also have to notice that in the
second proviso to sub Section (2A) of Section 42 of the
Act, provision is made that if no person falling under
Category 'A' of the Backward Classes is available, offices
- 18 -
W.A. No. 100259/2025 c/w
W.A. No. 100260/2025 (LB-ELE)
reserved for that category shall be filled by the persons
falling under Category 'B' and vice versa. Similar such
provision can also be made by the State Legislature
meeting the contingency where women candidates in a
particular category are not available. Such provisions
should be made without offending the vertical reservation.
21. For the reasons stated above, we do not find any
merit in the appeals. Accordingly, the writ appeals are
dismissed.
Sd/-
(R.DEVDAS)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(K V ARAVIND)
JUDGE
bvv
CT:VP
