IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MAY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE G.NARENDAR WRIT PETITION NO.18624/2019 (LB ELE) BETWEEN SHRI. GURUVINAYAKA S/O CHELUVARAJU, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.17, 4TH CROSS, PARAMAHAMSA ROAD, YADAVAGIRI, MYSURU-570 002.
(BY SRI SHIVAKUMAR, ADV.) AND 1. R. RAVINDRAKUMAR S/O LATE RAJAPPAJI, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.64/1, 3RD MAIN ROAD, 7TH CROSS, ALLANAHALLI EXTENSION, MYSURU-570018.
2. RAJU N S/O LATE NARAYANA D M AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.24/A, B.B.MILL ROAD, BANNIMANTAPA, MYSURU-570015 ... PETITIONER 3. MAHESH S S/O SHIVAMALLA NAYAKA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.65/2, MANJUNATHAPURA, 4TH STAGE, GOKULAM, MYSURU-570020.
4. SWAMY S/O LATE HANUMANTHA NAYAKA, RESIDING AT NO.118, GOKULAM 4TH STAGE, MANJUNATHAPURA, MYSURU-570 020.
5. B.N.VEENA, K.A.S THE RETURNING OFFICER (WARD NOS.18,23,24,40 & 41) ZONAL OFFICE 06, MYSURU CITY CORPORATION, NEW SHESHADRI AYYAR ROAD, MANDI MOHALLA, MYSURU-570021.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. KAVYASHREE G S, ADV. FOR C/R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNE ORDER AND JUDGEMENT PASSED BY THE HON'BLE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSURU IN E.P.NO.03/2018 DTD:9.4.2019 DECLARING THE ELECTION OF THE PETITION FROM WARD NO.18, MYSURU CITY CORPORATION AS NULL AND VOID AND PRAY FOR CALLING FOR THE RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND JUDGEMENT DTD:9.4.2019 WHICH IS ANNEXURE-A TO THE PETITION AND ON PERUSAL THEREOF TO MAKE THE RULE ABSOLUTE ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The counsel for the respondents submits that the provisions of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 (for short ‘the Act’), more particularly Section 38 of the Act provides for an appeal to be preferred against the order passed by the Election Tribunal under Section 37 of the Act, whereby the Election Tribunal was pleased to allow the election petition preferred by the first respondent herein and was pleased to set-aside the election of the petitioner.
3. It is submitted that in pursuance of the orders of the Election Tribunal, it is required of the aggrieved party to prefer an appeal under Section 38 of the Act. The contention of the respondent is borne out by a reading of the provisions of Section 38 of the Act. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is to be held as not maintainable. Learned counsel for the petitioner would place reliance on the ruling of the Hon’ble Apex Court reported in (2008) 12 SCC 481 to contend that the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable as the High Court is vested with the rights to adjudicate any matter. The citation and ruling, in the opinion of this court is inapplicable to the facts and circumstances of the case on hand as the dispute has arisen out of a election petition. In that view of the matter learned counsel prays that the interim order granted by this court be extended till filing of the appeal and that he be permitted to withdraw the instant writ petition with liberty to approach the appropriate authority.
4. The submission is placed on record. The writ petition is disposed off as withdrawn in the light of the fact that the petition is not maintainable in view of the provisions of Section 38 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act. Further, the interim order granted earlier by this court by order dated 26.04.2019 is extended by a period of 10 days only. Thereafter, if an application is preferred by the petitioner for grant of interim relief, the same could be considered on merits.
The Registry is directed to forthwith return the originals that have been filed along with this petition after retaining attested copies of the originals.
Petition is disposed off accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE Chs* CT-HR