Writ Petition No. 30979 of 2024 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4702 WP No. 30979 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 30979 OF 2024 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. MRS BHAGYAMMA W/O MR. NINGARAJU, AGED 45 YEARS, R/AT YARAGOMBALLI VILLAGE, YELANDUR TALUK, CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT - 571 441. (BY SRI. KESHAVA MURTHY B., ADVOCATE) …PETITIONER Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYATH RAJ, M.S.BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE - 560001. 2. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER, KOLLEGALA SUB-DIVISION, KOLLEGALA, CHAMARAJANAGARA DIST - 571 440. 3. THE YARABAMBALLI VILLAGE PANCHAYATH ADIJAMBAVARA STREET, YARAGAMBALLI VILLAGE, YELADUR TALUK, CHAMARAJANAGARA DIST - 571 441 REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
Legal Reasoning
(BY SMT. SPOORTHI.V., HCGP., FOR R-1 & R-2; SRI.S.NARENDRA., ADVOCATE FOR R-3) …RESPONDENTS - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4702 WP No. 30979 of 2024 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA., PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 07/11/2024 IN FORM NO. 2 ISSUED BY THE R2, ASST. COMMISSIONER, KOLLEGALA SUB-DIVISION, KOLLEGALA, IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND ALLOW THIS PETITION, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING in ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. A petition is filed challenging a notice by which the Assistant Commissioner has convened a special meeting to consider the motion of No-confidence that had been moved against the petitioner. 2. The Assistant Commissioner received a requisition by 13 members expressing their desire to move a motion of No-confidence against the petitioner. This requisition was dated 29.10.2024 and the same was also received by the Assistant Commissioner on the same day. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4702 WP No. 30979 of 2024 3. The Assistant Commissioner, thereafter, issued a notice dated 07.11.2024, by which, he convened a meeting on 22.11.2024 at 11.00 a.m. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that this notice was dispatched by the Assistant Commissioner on 08.11.2024 and was received by the petitioner on 10.11.2024 and the meeting being scheduled on 22.11.2024. It is argued that 15 days’ clear notice, as contemplated under Rule 3(2) of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Motion of No- Confidence against Adhyaksha an Upadhyaksha of Gram Panchayat) Rules, 1994 (for short the 'Rules') is not provided, and therefore, the entire proceedings are illegal. 5. Learned counsel sought to place reliance on the judgment rendered by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. No.101890/2022 to support his arguments. 6. Rule 3(2) of the Rules reads as follows- - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4702 WP No. 30979 of 2024 (2) The Assistant Commissioner shall thereafter convene a meeting for the consideration of the said motion at the office of the Grama Panchayat on the date appointed by him which shall not be later than thirty days from the date on which the notice under sub-rule (1) was delivered to him. He shall give to the members a notice of not less than fifteen clear days of such meeting in Form II: Provided that where the holding of such meeting is stayed by an order of a Court, the Assistant Commissioner shall adjourn the said meeting and shall hold the adjourned meeting on a date not later than thirty days from the date on which he receives the intimation about the vacation of stay, after giving to the members, after giving to the members a notice of not less than fifteen clear days of such adjourned meeting.” 7. As could be seen from the above, the primary obligation under Rule 3(2) of the Rules for the Assistant Commissioner is to convene a meeting within 30 days from the date on which he receives the requisition from the members. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:4702 WP No. 30979 of 2024 8. Basically, under the Rule, the first requirement is that the meeting should be convened within 30 days from the date on which the Assistant Commissioner receives the requisition from the members. 9. The second part of Rule 3(2) of the Rules states that he shall give to the members a notice of not less than 15 clear days of such meeting in Form No.II. 10. The Rule does not state that the Assistant Commissioner should give a notice of 15 days from the date of service of notice on the members. The Rule, therefore, requires only that a meeting should be convened on a day of which there is 15 days clear notice, thereby meaning that the meeting should be at least 15 days from the date of the notice. This would, however, be subject to the primary obligation to ensure that the meeting is convened within 30 days of the receipt of the requisition. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:4702 WP No. 30979 of 2024 11. If the argument of the petitioner is to be accepted, the entire process prescribed under Rule 3(2) would be frustrated inasmuch as if some of the members avoid service of notice, the convening of a meeting would be impossible and all that a member is required to do is to avoid service of notice until the 30 days period prescribed under the Rules to convene the meeting has elapsed or would be made to elapse. 12. To illustrate, if a requisition by the members is received on 1st of a month, the Assistant Commissioner would have to primarily ensure that the meeting is convened before the expiry of 30 days from the 1st of that month. The Assistant Commissioner is thereafter required to issue notices to all members. If a member ensures that the notice sent by the Assistant Commissioner is not delivered to him till the 16th of that month, it would not be possible for the Assistant Commissioner to convene a - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:4702 WP No. 30979 of 2024 meeting because more than 30 days would have elapsed if he were to give 15 days clear notice of the meeting thereafter. 13. Surely, it is not the intention of the legislature that wayward members should be allowed to adopt means that would frustrate the right of members to express their want of confidence in the Adhyaksha or the Upadhakshya and the Rule should be interpreted in a manner which fulfils the objective of the legislature and not in a manner which destroys its basic intent. 14. It is to be stated here that the only limitation prescribed under Rule 3(2) is that the meeting would have to be convened within 30 days of the requisition having been received by the Assistant Commissioner. There is no requirement in the Rule that the members are required to be served first, before a date for the meeting is fixed. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:4702 WP No. 30979 of 2024 15. It must be borne in mind that, in almost all cases, the Assistant Commissioner does serve a copy of the notice on the members, though attempts are made by some members to receive the notices. 16. It is to be stated here that Rule 3(2) is not dependent on the service of notice on the members and is only dependent on the requisition being made by the requisite number of members, as indicated in Sub-Rule (2) Rule 3. I am, therefore, of the view that there is no merit in the argument of the petitioner. 17. As far as the reliance placed on the judgment of this Court in W.P. No.101890/2022, it is to be noticed here that in the said decision, the Co-ordinate Bench has not considered the scope of Rule 3(2) nor did it interpret Rule 3(2) and it has decided the Writ Petition on the factual matrix therein. I am, therefore, of the view that the said decision would be - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:4702 WP No. 30979 of 2024 of no avail. Consequently, there is no merit in the
Decision
Writ Petition and the Writ Petition is dismissed. 18. Since the meeting convened with the Assistant Commissioner was stayed by virtue of an interim order of this Court, it would be appropriate to direct the Assistant Commissioner to conduct a special meeting within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 19. In view of the disposal of the petition, all pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE HNM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 74