Dismissed

Suresh Sangappa Savalagi v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC18 Sept 2013WP/76666/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners filed writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution to quash a calendar of events notice dated 26.02.2013 issued by the Taluk Executive Officer regarding Panchayat elections. The court dismissed the petitions, holding that no writ lies to quash the notice and the remedy lies in challenging the election results.

What did the court decide?

The writ petitions filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution are dismissed.

Suresh Sangappa Savalagi Vs the State of Karnataka — Election Law | Karnataka HC (2013)

¶1

: 1 :

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2013

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE H.N.NAGAMOHAN DAS

¶6

WRIT PETITION Nos. 76666-76667/2013 (LB-ELE)

¶7

BETWEEN :

¶8

Sri. SURESH SANGAPPA SAVALAGI AGE 43 YEARS, OCC. AGRICLUTURE AND MEMBER OF GRAM PANCHAYAT AT YADAWAD, R/O. MACHAKATTI ONI WARD No. I, YADAWAD GOKAK TQ., BELGAUM DIST.

¶9

Sri. VITTHAL MALAPPA PUJARI AGE 43 YEARS, OCC. AGRICLUTURE AND MEMBER OF GRAM PANCHAYAT AT YADAWAD, R/O. MACHAKATTI ONI WARD No. I, YADAWAD GOKAK TQ., BELGAUM DIST. … PETITIONERS

¶10

(BY Sri. JAGADISH PATIL, ADV.)

¶11

AND :

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY PANCHAYAT RAJ M S BUILDING, BANGALORE.

¶13

THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BELGAUM.

¶14

: 2 :

¶15

THE ASST. COMMISSIONER BAILHONGAL BAILHONGAL.

¶16

THE TALUK EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND ELECTION OFFICER, GOKAK.

¶17

THE GRAM PANCHAYAT YADAWAD, TQ. GOKAK DIST. BELGAUM. … RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY Smt. VIDYAVATHI, AGA, FOR R-1 TO 4 SHS IN RESPECT OF R-5)

¶19

THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA WITH A PRAYER TO SET ASIDE THE NOTICE DATED 26.02.2013 ISSUED BY R-4 AND ETC.

¶20

THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

In these writ petitions the petitioners have prayed for a writ in

¶23

the nature of certiorari to quash the notice dated 26.02.2013 –

¶24

Annexure A.

¶25

The impugned notice is calendar of events. Learned

¶26

Additional Government Advocate submits that as per the calendar of

¶27

: 3 :

¶28

events elections are held and results are declared. Therefore the question of quashing Annexure A will not arise. However it is open for the petitioners to work out their remedy in accordance with law before the appropriate forum questioning the results of the elections, if they so desire. Accordingly, the writ petitions are hereby dismissed.

¶29

��

¶30

Lrs.

Suresh Sangappa Savalagi v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Sangappa Savalagi v. the State of Karnataka

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

Mohammed Habibulla Basha Vs Special Land Acquisition Officer

Gourishankar S/O. Ramappa Rayaji Vs the Assistant Registrar of Co-Operative Societies

D Swamy Rao S/O. Yenkoba Rao Vs the State of Karnataka

Srinivas S/O. Prakash Kyarakatti Vs the Commissioner of

Venkappa S/O. Ramappa Maraddi Vs the District Registrar of Societies

Anilkumar Shirahatti S/O Parameshwar Vs the State of Karnataka