IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION No.55415/2018 (LB-RES) Between:
Sri. N.E. Ramakrishnappa S/o. Late Eerappa, Aged about 44 years, R/at Nagavangala Village, Tarikere Thaluk, Chikmagalur District – 577 101. …Petitioner (By Sri. Prakash M.H., Advocate) And:
1. The State of Karnataka, Rep. by the Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayath Raj, M.S. Building, Ambedkar Street, Bengaluru – 560 001.
2. The Assistant Commissioner, Tarikere Sub-Division, Tarikere, Chikmagalur District – 577 228.
3. The Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayath, Tarikere, Chikmagalur District – 577 228.
4. Korateekere Gram Panchayath, Tarikere, Chikmagalur District – 577 228. Rep. by the Panchayath Development Officer.
5. Dharnesh N.M., Age: Major, Member, Korateekere Gram Panchayath, Tarikere, Chikmagalur District – 577 228.
6. Smt. Prabhavathi, Age: Major, Member, Korateekere Gram Panchayath, Tarikere, Chikmagalur District – 577 228.
7. Kumar V.M., Age: Major, Member, Korateekere Gram Panchayath, Tarikere, Chikmagalur District – 577 228.
8. Smt. Chandramma, Age: Major, Member, Korateekere Gram Panchayath, Tarikere, Chikmagalur District – 577 228.
9. Smt. Chethana K.K., Age: Major, Member, Korateekere Gram Panchayath, Tarikere, Chikmagalur District – 577 228.
10. Smt. N. Prema, Age: Major, Member, Korateekere Gram Panchayath, Tarikere, Chikmagalur District – 577 228.
11. Jayamma, Age: Major, Member, Korateekere Gram Panchayath, Tarikere, Chikmagalur District – 577 228.
12. Ravikumar, Age: Major, Member, Korateekere Gram Panchayath, Tarikere, Chikmagalur District – 577 228 ... Respondents (By Sri. M.A. Subramani, HCGP for R-1 and R-2; Sri. Arun K.S., Advocate for R-5 to R-12; Notice to R-3 and R-4 is dispensed with) This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the meeting notice dated 24.11.2018 issued by the respondent No.2 vide Annexure-G as illegal and consequently declare the motion of no-confidence dated 20.11.2018 initiated by the respondent Nos.5 to 12 against petitioner vide Annexure-F as illegal and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The petitioner has challenged the notice at Annexure-G dated 24.11.2018, whereby the Assistant Commissioner had sought to convene a meeting on 15.12.2018 to consider the motion of no-confidence moved by the members of the Gram Panchayat. It is stated that the notice came to be issued pursuant to the complaint at Annexure-F dated 20.11.2018.
2. The petitioner contends that the complaint contains allegations. As it is noticed from a plain perusal of Annexure-F dated 20.11.2018, the said fact is not in dispute.
3. In light of the law laid down by the Division Bench in the case of Smt.Lakshmamma v. State of Karnataka and Others reported in 2019 (1) Kar.L.J.94 (DB), it is clear that motion of no-confidence with allegations cannot be considered till appropriate Rules are framed.
4. The learned counsel for respondent Nos.5 to 12 has filed a memo that the members do not intend to proceed with the motion of no-confidence and they would withdraw the complaint made before the Assistant Commissioner. Accordingly, the notice issued by the Assistant Commissioner at Annexure-G dated 24.11.2018 is set aside.
5. It is made clear that the members of the Gram Panchayat are at liberty to move the motion of no- confidence in accordance with Section 49 of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 as per law. If such, motion of no-confidence is passed, the Assistant Commissioner to ensure that there is no infraction of the Rule 3(2) of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Motion of No-Confidence Against Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Grama Panchayat) Rules, 1994.
In light of the observations made above, this petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SJK