Back
Karnataka High Court
FAKIRAPPA DURGAPPA HARIJAN - Appellant
Versus
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, GADAG SUB-DIVISION, gadag - Respondent
Decided On : 02-11-05
W.P. : 6585 of 2005
Quashing of notice of no-confidence
KARNATAKA PANCHAYAT RAJ (MOTION OF NO-CONFIDENCE AGAINST ADHYAKSHA AND UPADHAYAKSHA OF GRAMA PANCHAYAT) RULES, 1994 - Rule 3 -Quashing of notice of no-confidence -Time left between scheduled no-confidence motion and elections to the Panchayat -Oddly ten days -Held, the litigation is frivolous. See, Constitution of India -Articles 226 & 227.
Constitution of India -Locus standi -Articles 226 & 227 -Locus standi -Petition seeking quashing of no-confidence motion against Adhyaksha of Gram Panchayat -Petitioner not an aggrieved person -Has no locus standi. [V. Gopala Gowda, J]: The no confidence motion is not moved against the petitioner. Hence, he cannot be the aggrieved person. The aggrieved person has not filed this writ petition. The petitioner has no locus stand to question the impugned no confidence motion notice. If the petitioner is not in favour of no confidence motion, he can cast his vote against the motion. Instead of doing so, unnecessary he has approached this Court, which is wholly unwarranted.
Frivolous litigation
Constitution of India - Articles 226 & 227 -Frivolous litigation -Petition seeking quashing of notice of no-confidence motion -Time left between scheduled no-confidence motion and elections to the panchayat -Oddly ten days -Held, the litigation is frivolous.
[V. Gopala Gowda, J]: Writ petition is liable to be dismissed for several reasons. Annexure.-B is the Calender of Events for conducting election. The election is scheduled on 25-2-2005. The no confidence motion is scheduled on 15-2-2005. Thus, there is hardly 10 days between the scheduled no confidence motion meeting and elections. In view of mere 10 days gap between the two events, the petitioner should not have approached the Court. This is nothing but a frivolous and luxurious petition.
Locus standi
Constitution of India - Articles 226 & 227 -Locus standi -Petition seeking quashing of no-confidence motion against Adhyaksha of Gram Panchayat -Petitioner not an aggrieved person -Has no locus standi.
[V. Gopala Gowda, J]: The no confidence motion is not moved against the petitioner. Hence, he cannot be the aggrieved person. The aggrieved person has not filed this writ petition. The petitioner has no locus stand to question the impugned no confidence motion notice. If the petitioner is not in favour of no confidence motion, he can cast his vote against the motion. Instead of doing so, unnecessary he has approached this Court, which is wholly unwarranted.
( 1 ) SINCE this writ petition can be disposed of at preliminary hearing stage itself, Sri H. B. Narayan, High Court Government Pleader is directed to take notice on behalf of first respondent.
( 2 ) THE petitioner is member of 2nd respondent-Gram Panchayat. He is seeking to quash the notice of no-confidence motion at Annexure-A, dated 22-1-2005 moved against the Adhyaksha of the Gram Panchayat.
( 3 ) THIS writ petition is liable to be dismissed for several reasons. Annexure-B is the calendar of events for conducting election. The election is scheduled on 25-2-2005. The no-confidence motion is scheduled on 15-2-2005. Thus, there is hardly 10 days between the scheduled no-confidence motion meeting and elections. In view of mere 10 days gap between the two events, the petitioner should not have approached the Court. This is nothing but a frivolous and luxurious petition.
( 4 ) THE no-confidence motion is not moved against the petitioner. Hence, he cannot be the aggrieved person. The aggrieved person has not filed this writ petition. The petitioner has no locus standi to question the impugned no-confidence motion notice.
( 5 ) IF the petitioner is not in favour of no-confidence motion, he can cast his vote against the motion. Instead of doing so, unnecessarily he has approached this Court, which is wholly unwarranted.
( 6 ) THOUGH this is a fit case to impose cost upon the petitioner, this court takes a lenient view. It is hoped that the petitioner will desist from approaching this Court in future on flimsy grounds.
( 7 ) WRIT petition is dismissed with the above observation.
( 8 ) LEARNED High Court Government Pleader to file memo of appearance in three weeks.
--- *** ---
.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
