Allowed

Shri Harishganta S/O Sathyanarayan G v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC7 Feb 2023WP/100341/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a writ petition challenging a notice for a no confidence motion. Given the responsiveness from the relevant party regarding the quashing of the notice, liberty was reserved for a fresh motion in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is allowed and the impugned notice dated 02.01.2023 is quashed. Liberty is reserved to the respondents to move a fresh no confidence motion.

Shri Harishganta S/O Sathyanarayan G Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - WP No. 100341 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 100341/2023 (LB-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SHRI HARISHGANTA, S/O SATHYANARAYAN G, AGE : 31, OCC.: AGRICULTURIST, SANGAPUR VILLAGE, R/O. # 227, 1^ST WARD, NEAR SHREERAMA TEMPLE, SANGAPUR, TQ. GANGAVATHI, DIST. KOPPAL-583227. (BY SRI. R H ANGADI, ADVOCATE)

¶9

PETITIONER

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYATH RAJ & RURAL DEVELOPMENT, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU.

¶12

Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad

¶13

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, GANGAVATHI SUB DIVISION, SANGAPUR, TQ. GANGAVATHI, DIST. KOPPAL-583227.

¶14

THE GRAM PANCHAYATH, SANGAPUR VILALGE, TQ. GANGAVATHI, DIST. KOPPAL-583227.

¶15

SHRI GANGAPPA S/O THIPPANNA, AGE: MAJOR, OCC.:AGRICULTURE, SANGAPUR, TQ. GANGAVATHI, DIST. KOPPAL-583227.

¶16

SMT. YELLAMMA W/O BASAVARAJ, AGE: MAJOR, OCC.:AGRICULTURE AND HOUSEHOLD, SANGAPUR, TQ.: GANGAVATHI, DIST. KOPPAL-583227.

¶17

¶18

WP No. 100341 of 2023

¶19

SHRI B. GOPI S/O SURYANARAYAN, AGE: MAJOR, OCC.: AGRICULTURE, SANGAPUR, TQ. GANGAVATHI, DIST. KOPPAL-583227.

¶20

SHRI VENKAT SHRINIVAS S/O. SURYANARAYAN, AGE: MAJOR, OCC.AGRICULTURE, SANGAPUR, TQ. GANGAVATHI, DIST. KOPPAL-583227.

¶21

SMT. LAKSHIMYAVVA W/O HANUMANT GUNTURU, AGE: MAJOR, OCC.AGRICULTURE, SANGAPUR, TQ. GANGAVATHI, DIST. KOPPAL-583227.

¶22

SMT. RENUKAMMA W/O HANUMESH, AGE: MAJOR, OCC.: AGRICULTURE, SANGAPUR, TQ. GANGAVATHI, DIST. KOPPAL-583227.

¶23

SMT. KILLI W/O AMARESH, AGE: MAJOR, OCC.: AGRICULTURE, SANGAPUR, TQ. GANGAVATHI, DIST. KOPPAL-583227.

¶24

SMT. KHATIJA BEGUM W/O SYAMIDASAAB, AGE: MAJOR, OCC.:AGRICULTURE, SANGAPUR, TQ. GANGAVATHI, DIST. KOPPAL-583227.

¶25

SMT. HASEENABANU W/O SHAREEFMEEYA, AGE: MAJOR, OCC.: AGRICULTURE, SANGAPUR, TQ. GANGAVATHI, DIST. KOPPAL-583227.

¶26

RESPONDENTS

¶27

(BY SRI. PRASHANT V. MOGALI, HCGP FOR R1 & R2, SRI ANAND R. KOLLI, ADVOCATE FOR R4 TO R12, NOTICE TO R3 IS SERVED)

¶28

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF

¶29

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 02/01/2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND FURTHER PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO THE SAID NOTICE DATED 02/01/2023 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 & ETC.

¶30

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

¶31

¶32

WP No. 100341 of 2023

¶33

ORDER

¶34

This writ petition is directed against the impugned notice at Annexure-C dated 02.01.2023 issued by the respondent No.2Assistant Commissioner and for other reliefs.

¶35

2. On 17.01.2023 this Court passed the following order.

¶36

“Learned HCGP accepts notice for respondent Nos.1 & 2. Issue emergent notice to respondent Nos.3 to 12, returnable by 07.02.2023.

¶37

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶38

In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, the learned counsel for the petitioner invites my attention to the Annexure-B, the alleged notice, which contains the various material discrepancies which would invalidate and vitiate the same and consequently impugned notice issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Koppal dated 02.01.2023 proposing to holding the meeting to consider the no confidence motion on 23.01.2023 deserves to be quashed.

¶39

Submission is placed on record.

¶40

All further proceedings pursuant to Annexure-C dated 02.01.2023 are stayed till next hearing date.

¶41

Re-list on 07.02.2023.”

¶42

¶43

WP No. 100341 of 2023

¶44

As can be seen from the aforesaid interim order, the proposed ‘No Confidence Motion’ scheduled to be conducted on 21.01.2023 was stayed by this Court.

¶45

Learned counsel appearing for respondents No.4 to 12 has filed a memo which reads as under:

¶46

“The above top noted petition the respondent No.4 to 12 had moved the application for no confidence against the petitioner and now in view of the interim order passed by this Hon’ble Court the writ petition does not survive for consideration. Hence, the respondents had no objection to allow the writ petition.

¶47

The respondent No.4 to 12 respectfully submits that liberty may kindly be reserved to move fresh no confidence motion as against the petitioner if they intend to do so. Hence respondents had no objection to allow the writ petition in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶48

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the specific stance of the respondents No.4 to 12 that they have no objection to allow the writ petition, the instant writ petition deserves to be allowed reserving liberty in favour of the respondents No.4 to 12 to move a fresh ‘No Confidence Motion’ in accordance with law.

¶49

In the result, I pass the following order.

¶50

¶51

WP No. 100341 of 2023

¶52

ORDER

¶53

i) Writ petition is allowed;

¶54

ii) Impugned notice dated 02.01.2023 vide Annexure-C is quashed reserving liberty in favour of the respondents No.4 to 12 to take necessary steps in accordance with law.

¶55

SD/JUDGE

¶56

BVV/ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 62

Shri Harishganta S/O Sathyanarayan G v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Harishganta S/O Sathyanarayan G 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

Shri.Nimbenna S/O Siddalingappa Devangavi Vs the Secretary

Prasad Talwar S/O Ashok Talwar Vs University of Agricultural Sciences

Shrinivas S/O Shankar Kattimani Vs the State of Karnataka

Bharatkumar S/O Indurao Rangole Vs Sharadkumar S/O Indurao Rangole

Dr. Tatasaheb Pawadeppa Bangi, Vs Sri Chamaraj Pawadeppa Bangi

V Rajashekar @ Shekar S/O Timmappa Vs the State of Karnataka