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

1998 Supreme(Kar) 524

T.S.THAKUR
M. MUNIYAPPA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent


T. S. THAKUR, J.

( 1 ) REMOVAL of the petitioners from the posts of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of the Grama panchayat pursuant to a no confidence motion moved against them has been called in question in these Writ Petitions. The solitary ground urged is that the meeting of the Grama Panchayat convened to discuss the motion had been held more than 30 days after a notice of the motion was given and was therefore in violation of the provisions of Rule 3 (2) of what are known as karnataka Panchayat Raj (Motion of No-confidence against Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of grama Panchayat) Rules, 1994. Rule 3 no doubt envisages the holding of a meeting of the grama Panchayat not later than 30 days from the date on which a notice of no confidence is moved against the Adhyaksha or the Upadhyaksha under Sub-rule 1 of the said rule. The petitioners maintain that the said provision is mandatory and a meeting convened more than 30 days after the receipt of the no confidence motion by the Assistant Commissioner would be illegal rendering any resolution passed in any such meeting legally unsound and inconsequential. Whether or not the provision is mandatory and whether this Court should interfere with t













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