Abdul Nazeer, J

The Petitioner is the Adhyaksha of Gram Panchayat of Ladwanti village, Basavakalyan Taluk, Bidar District. The Gram Panchayat consists of twelve members. Eight members of the Gram Panchayat moved a motion of no confidence against the petitioner under sub-rule(1) of Rule 3 of Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Motion of no confidence against Adhyakasha and Upadhyaksha of Grama Panchayat) Rules, 1994 (for short "the Rules"). On the basis of the said motion of no confidence, the first respondent issued notice at Annexure 'C' dated 28.10.2008 to the members of the Grama Panchayat under sub-rule(2) of Rule 3 of the Rules, convening a special meeting of the members of the Grama Panchayath on 19.11.2008 at 10.00 a.m. for consideration of the said motion of no confidence. The petitioner has called in question the validity of the said notice in this Writ Petition.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would contend that two members out of eight members who have moved the motion of no confidence are deemed to be disqualified from the membership of the panchayat under sub-Section (1)(c) of Section 13 of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (for short "the Act"). Therefore, they cannot participate in the meeting convened for consideration of the said motion. It is further argued that an application seeking their disqualification has been filed before the State Election Commission and pending disposal of the said application, they can be neither be the signatories to the proposed motion of no confidence nor can they participate in the meeting convened for the said purpose. Therefore, he prays for quashing of the impugned notice.

4. Learned Advocates appearing for the respondents submit that, in order to move the motion of no confidence, it is sufficient if 1/3rd of the members of the Panchayat sign the proposed motion. Therefore, there was no impediment for moving the motion of no confidence, because eight out of twelve members of the panchayat have signed the motion. It is further argued that though an application for consideration of disqualification of two members viz., respondent Nos. 3 and 4 is pending before State Election Commission, no order has been passed on the said application. Therefore, there is no bar for them to participate in the meeting convened for consideration of motion of no confidence. In this connection, they have relied on the decision of this Court in the case of N. Gundappa Poojary Vs Assistant Commissioner, Outtur Sub-Division, Puttur, Daksihna Kannada District 1997 (2) KLJ 497.

5. In the light of the rival contentions of the parties, the question for consideration is whether the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 can join the other members of the Panchayat in moving the motion of no confidence against the petitioner and participate in the meeting convened for consideration of the said motion pending disposal of the application before the State Election Commission seeking their disqualification?

6. Section13 of the Act provides for vacation of the seat by members. The relevant provisions for the purpose of this case are sub-Sections (1)(c) and (2) of Section 13 of the Act, which are as under:

"13. Vacation of seat by members: (1) If a member of a Grama Panchayat,-

(a)xxxxxx

(b) xxxxxxxxxx

(c) absents himself for more than three consecutive ordinary meetings of the Grama Panchayat without the leave of the Grama Panchayat, his seat shall be deemed to be or to have become, as the case maybe, vacant.

(2) If any question arises as to whether a person is, or has become subject to disqualification under sub-Section (1), the State Election Commission may either suo motu or on a report made to it and after giving an opportunity to the person concerned of being heard, decide the question."

7. Section 49 of the Act provides for moving the motion of no confidence against the Adhyaksha or Upadhyaksha of the Grama Panchayat. Rule 3 of the Rules contemplates the procedu