The main legal point established in the judgment is that the disqualification proceedings under the Karnataka Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 1987, require minimum proof and evidence, and the quasi-criminal nature of the proceedings necessitates adherence to legal principles and the rules of evidence.

( 1 ) ALL these writ appeals may be dispo the sed of by this common order, since they raise one and the same point.

( 2 ) THE appellants are the membersof Yelechagahalli mandal panchayat. They were elected as members on 20th of Jan the uary, 1987 under the provisions of the karnataka Zilla Parishads, Taluk Panchayat samithis, Mandal Panchayats and Nyaya panchayats Act, 1983. The appellant namely Y. M. Basappa was further elected as Pradhana of the Mandal Panchayat. The appellants received a notice dated 7th july, 1989 from the Chief Secretary, hassan District Zilla Parishad, Hassan, calling upon them to show cause why they should not be disqualified under sec the tion 3 (1) (A) read with Section 4 (1) (a) of the Karnataka Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 1987, stating that e complaint had been preferred by presid the ent, Hassan District Janata Party, Hassan (M. G. Dodde Gowda, respondent No. 2 herein) to the effect that the appellants had voluntarily left the party (Janata paity) on which ticket they were elected and joined the Congress-1 party. On receipt of the said show cause notice, the appellants made their appearance through their advocate and filed their objections to the show cause notice. In their objections they contended that they had not commi the tted any act opposed to the relevant provisions of the Act and therefore the complaint was mis-conceived and was liable to be dismissed. It was further contended that Janata Party is no more in existence in view of the fact that the said party had merged with Lok Dal and as a result of which Janata Dal has been formed.

( 3 ) WITHOUT conducting any enquiryor taking evidence, the matter was pro the ceeded with by the first respondent (Chief secretary, Zilla Parishad ). He came to the conclusion that in so far as the appel the ants had not specifically denied their leaving Janata Party, it must be presumed that they have voluntarily left and there the fore they are liable for disqualification. To this effect, he passed an order on 4th of August. 1989. This was questioned in the writ petitions.

( 4 ) OUR learned brother Chandrakantharajurs, J. was of the view that the complaint of the writ petitioners before him that no evidence was recorded and there is no proof that the petitioners before him had resigned from Janata Party and joined Congress-1 party cannot be accepted, because the order of the Chief secretary was a lengthy one. If the petitioners had not examined themselves, they alone were to be blamed. Further he held in so far as there is no specific denial of the parties. Order 8 Rule 5 of the code of Civil Procedure would apply. Thus, he dismissed the writ petitions. It is under these circumstances, the writ appeals have come to be preferred - Writ appeals 1588 to 1591 of 1989 against writ Petitions 14256 to 14259 of 1989 and Writ Appeal 1476 of 1989 against writ Petition 14255 of 1989.

( 5 ) THE contention of Mr. A. K. Subbaiah, the learned counsel for the appellants is this: in the matter of disqualification of any member as contemplated under Ss. 3 and 4, serious consequences follow. The pro the ceedings are quasi criminal in nature. First and foremost, therefore, it is essential on the part of the Chief Secretary, to decide a charge under Section 4, to have insisted upon atleast the minimum proof that was required of those who alleged that the appellants had left Janata party. A news item appearing in press cannot tantamount to proof. The Chief Secretary having held so cannot merely rest his conclusion on the non denial in the objection statement to the show cause notice filed by the appellants. Once the allegation is made that the appellants were subjected to dis the qualification, the onus of proving the dis the qualification is of. the persons to alleging. In this case nothing whatever was done excepting to cause a complaint through the President of Hassan District Zilla parishad and producing a news item appe the aring in the loc