Allowed

Sri M R Satish v. the Secretary, (Panchyaat Raj)

Karnataka HC26 Apr 2013WP/16829/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought a mandamus directing the State Election Commission and others to fill four vacant Grama Panchayat posts. The Court directed the Commission to hold the election for these specific posts by a fixed date.

What did the court decide?

Directed the State Election Commission to complete the election for four vacant posts in Guddekoppa Grama Panchayat on or before 30.06.2013.

Sri M R Satish Vs the Secretary, (Panchyaat Raj) — Election Law | Karnataka HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

¶3

DATED THIS THE 26^th DAY OF APRIL 2013

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A S BOPANNA

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.16829/2013 (LB-ELE)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI M R SATISH S/O RUKMAIAHGOUDA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS PRESIDENT GRAM PANCHAYAT GUDDE KOPPA R/O MANGALA VILLAGE KONANDUR POST TQ:THIRTHAHALLI DIST SHIMOGA-577422 ... PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI SHIVAYOGESHA, ADV. FOR M/S. SHIVAYOGIMATH ASSOCIATES)

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE SECRETARY, (PANCHYAAT RAJ) DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYAT RAJ M S BUILDING BANGALORE-01

¶12

THE SECRETARY STATE ELECTION COMMISSION K S C F BUILDING NO.8, CUNNINGHAM ROAD BANGALORE-01

¶13

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SHIMOGA DIST SHIMOGA-577201

¶14

THE ADMINISTRATOR/ASSISTANT DIRECTOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY

¶15

¶16

THIRTHAHALLI, TQ THIRTHAHALLI DIST: SHIMOGA-577422

¶17

THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER GUDDEKOPPA GRAMA PANCHAYATI TQ: THIRTHAHALLI DIST: SHIMOGA-577422 ... RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SMT. MANJULA R KAMADOLLI, HCGP FOR R1,3 & 4 SRI K N PHANINDRA, ADV. FOR R2)

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, WITH A PRAYER TO DIRECT R-3 & 4 TO CONDUCT THE ELECTION FOR THE REMAINING 4 MEMBERS OF THE GRAM PANCHAYAT, GUDDEKOPPA VILLAGE, THIRTHAHALLI TQ., SHIMOGA DIST.,

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING :

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

The petitioner is before this Court seeking for issue of mandamus to direct respondents No.3 and 4 to conduct

¶23

the election for the four vacant posts of the Grama Panchayat, Guddekoppa village, Thirthahalli Taluk, Shimoga District.

¶24

The petitioner is one of the members elected to the said Grama Panchayat. The petitioner who was the president is presently prejudiced in view of there being no quorum in the Grama Panchayat. It is in that

¶25

¶26

circumstance, the petitioner contends that since four posts of the member is vacant, the Grama Panchayat is not in a position to effectively function. Hence the petitioner is before this Court seeking for issue of mandamus to the respondents to complete the election process.

¶27

Learned counsel representing the second respondent would submit that the second respondent has addressed a communication dated 15.03.2013 to the Deputy Commissioners of all the districts calling for details of the vacancies in the different Grama Panchayats so as to take steps to hold election on a common date. The reply to the communication is awaited and as soon as the same is received, the process would commence.

¶28

4. Having noticed these aspects of the matter, it is

¶29

to be taken note that in the instant case, the resignation of four members was accepted on 23.01.2013 and nearly three months have elapsed. In any event, an administrator can discharge the function for the period of

¶30

¶31

six months, but it need not be prolonged till that period. Therefore keeping these aspects in view, the second respondent is directed to complete the election process in respect of the Guddekoppa Grama Panchayat for the said four posts on or before 30.06.2013 even if the details of the other Grama Panchayats is not made available to the second respondent. The process in regard to other Grama Panchayats shall be commenced thereafter.

¶32

In terms of the above, the petition is disposed of.

¶33

Sd/JUDGE

¶34

akc/bms

Sri M R Satish v. the Secretary, (Panchyaat Raj)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri M R Satish v. the Secretary, (Panchyaat Raj)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. D.P. Dakshayani Vs the Commissioner

Sri Mallappa Vs the Davangere Municipal Corporation

Smt Kavitha Prasad Vs the Urban Development Department

Sri Janaradhanaiah S/O Seetharamaiah Vs Bangalore Mahanagara Palike

Mr K S Krishna Vs the Commissioner

Al Rehaman Masjid Commitee Vs the Bantwala Thaluk Panchayath