SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1975 Supreme(SC) 222

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A. ALAGIRISWAMI, P.N. BHAGWATI AND P.K. GOSWAMI, JJ.
State of Karnataka and others, Appellants
Versus
G. Nagappa and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 561 of 1975, D/-21-7-1975.
Advocates appeared
Mr. L N. Sinha, Sol. Gen, of India, (Mr. M. Veerappa, Advocate with him) for Appellants. Mr. V. M. Tarkunde, Sr. Advocate (M/s. S. S. Javali, A. K. Srivastava and B. P. Singh, Advocates with him) for Nos. 1-9, 16, 17, 19-21 and 26-30. Mr. H. B. Datar, Sr. Advocate (Mr. R. B. Datar, Advocate with him) for Nos. 18 and 25), for Respondents.

Advocates:
A.K.SRIVASTAVA, B.P.SINGH, H.B.DATAR, L.N.Sinha, M.VIRAPPA, R.B.DATAR, S.S.JAVALI, V.M.TARKUNDE

Headnote:

Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 - Section 13 - Appointment of Administrator - Matter of Holding Election - There is a town called Gangawati in State of Karnataka - It had a Town Municipal Council constituted under the Karnataka Municipalities Act - Term of office of the Municipal Councilors elected at last General Elections expired by efflux of time in 1962, but instead of holding a General Election to constitute a new Town Municipal Council, State Government appointed an Administrator to exercise powers and perform and discharge functions and duties of Town Municipal Council and also constituted an Advisory Council to advise and assist Administrator - Appointment of Administrator and constitution of Advisory Council were challenged by one of the residents of Gangawati in High Court of Karnataka by Writ Petition - Writ petition was, however, settled as State Government gave an undertaking that it would take necessary steps for holding a General Election within a reasonable time – Held, on a proper interpretation of the provision of the Act, that the Legislature did not intend that the list of voters should change from time to time during process of election and relevant Electoral Roll for purpose of preparation of the list of voters must consequently be taken to be Electoral Roll in force at date when election process commenced, that is, the date when calendar of events was published - We are in agreement with that view - Poll in present case must, therefore, be taken on basis of the list of voters for each division prepared with reference to Electoral Roll in force that being date on which calendar of events was published by Returning Officer - It is not necessary for purpose of present appeal to decide this question, but we may point out that till election process has commenced by issue of notice fixing calendar of events, there is no reason why the designated officer should not be entitled to rectify such defect in list of voters and bring list of voters in conformity with the Electoral Roll - But once calendar of events is published and election process has begun, it is extremely doubtful whether any changes can be made in the list of voters for the purpose of setting right any such defect - We, however, do not wish to express any final opinion on this point - Appeal dismissed.

Judgment

BHAGWATI, J.:- There is a town called Gangawati in the State of Karnataka. It had a Town Municipal Council constituted under the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964. The term of office of the Municipal Councilors elected at the last General Elections expired by efflux of time in 1962, but instead of holding a General Election to constitute a new Town Municipal Council, the State Government appointed an Administrator to exercise the powers and perform and discharge the functions and duties of the Town Municipal Council and also constituted an Advisory Council to advise and assist the Administrator. The appointment of the Administrator and the constitution of the Advisory Council were challenged by one of the residents of Gangawati in the High Court of Karnataka by Writ Petition No. 2405 of 1972. The writ petition was, however, settled as the State Government gave an undertaking that it would take the necessary steps for holding a General Election within a reasonable time. This happened on 6th February, 1974. The State Government thereafter, in accordance with the undertaking given by it, appointed the Returning Officer on 25th February, 1974 and it looked as if the General Election was at least going to be held. But this hope was belied. Before the Returning Officer could issue a notice fixing the calendar of events for the election, the State Government rescinded the notification which had been issued by it earlier under Section 13 of the Act determining inter alia the territorial divisions into which the Municipality shall be divided. The result was that no further steps could be taken by the Returning Officer in the matter of holding the election. Angered and frustrated by this second attempt on the part of the State Government to baulk the holding of the election, the same individual, who had filed the earlier writ petition, preferred another writ petition, namely, Writ Petition No. 2715 of 1974, for a mandamus to the State Government to hold the election. The High Court made an order on this writ Petition on 7th August, 1974 directing the state Government to hold the election within four months. This time was later extended to 8th March, 1975.

2. Pursuant to the direction of the High Court the State Government issued a Notification dated 3rd December, 1974 under S. 13 of the Act determining the territorial divisions into which the Gangawati Municipality shall be divided for the purpose of holding the election and allotting number of seats to each territorial division. The Gangawati Municipality was divided into six territorial divisions and each territorial division was defined and demarcated by reference to census block numbers, wards and also boundaries. The Returning Officer thereafter on 7th December, 1974 issued a notice fixing the calendar of events for holding the election. The Tehsildar, who was the designated officer under Section 14, sub-s. (2), in the meanwhile, prepared the list of voters for each division from the Mysore Legislative Assembly Electoral Roll (hereinafter referred to as the Electoral Roll) by including in the list parts of the Electoral Roll referable to the census block numbers comprised within the division. The list of voters for each division so prepared was authenticated by the designated officer and kept open for inspection in he office of the Municipal Council. A large number of nominations were filed on or before the last date fixed for it in the calendar of events and after scrutiny and withdrawal, a list of the contesting candidates was published by the Returning Officer on 21st December, 1974. The only step which remained to be taken to complete the process of election was the poll which was fixed on 10th January, 1975.

3. However, on 21st December, 1974 when the question of finalisation of polling stations was taken up by the Returning Officer, the Secretary of the Congress Party raised an objection that the divisionwise lists of voters prepared and authenticated by the designated
























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top