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

2005 Supreme(Kar) 269

D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR
H. SHIVAPPA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent


D. V SHYLENDRA KUMAR, J.

( 1 ) IN all these petitions, wherein mainly persons elected as Councilors to various City Municipal Councils in the State figure as petitioners, the question that is involved is as to whether the Government Notification no. UDD 51 MLR 2004 (P-1), dated 1-9-2004 issued by the first respondent-State for the purposes of Section 42 (2-A) of the Karnataka municipalities Act, 1964 (for short, 'the Act') providing for reservation of the posts of 'president' and 'vice-President' in various City Municipal councils; is in conformity with the very provisions, namely, Section 42 (2-A) of the Act and if not as to whether any intervention is called for.

( 2 ) WHILE it is the assertion of some of the petitioners that the reservations as provided in terms of Notification dated 1-9-2004 bristles with various anomalies, discrepancies, virtually flouting the very provisions; that while in respect of some of the Councils, the reservation had been provided in excess, in the sense that, the reservation has been provided repetitively. Complaint of some of the other petitioners not falling in this category is that there is a lacking in providing such reservation; that by not provi




























































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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top