The question raised in these writ petitions is whether the members of the house of the people (Lok Sabha) and the members of the State Legislative Assembly (Vidhan Sabha), whose constituencies lie within a municipal area, have voting right at a Special General Meeting convened under Section 42(9) of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 (‘the Act’) for the purpose of moving a no confidence motion against the President and Vice President of a Municipal Council?

The question is answered in the negative.

2. In these writ petitions, the petitioners are challenging the resolution dated 28.01.2015 passed by the Municipal Council expressing ‘no-confidence’ against petitioner no.1 resulting in her removal from the post of the President of the City Municipal Council, Basavakalyan. The total number of Elected Councillors is 31. It is not in dispute that twenty councillors of the Municipal Council, and, respondent no.4, who is a member of the Lok Sabha and respondent no.5, who is a member of the Vidhan Sabha, whose constituencies lie within the municipal area of Basavakalyan, had voted in favour of the no-confidence motion and 11 councillors voted against the no-confidence motion.

3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record.

4. Sri G.R.Gurumath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that members of the Lok Sabha and members of the Vidhan Sabha referred to in Section 11(1)(c) of the Act are not Councillors, and therefore, voting by respondent nos.4 & 5 for the no-confidence motion is illegal, and hence, removal of petitioner no.1 from the post of the President of the Municipal Council, pursuant to such a no-confidence motion is unsustainable in law. In support of his submission, he relied on an unreported decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Smt. Chandubi v. The Deputy Commissioner in W.P.No.12320 of 1997 (DD 10.12.1997) and also another Division Bench decision of this Court in Smt. Savitri vs. State of Karnataka & Ors. [ILR 2003 KAR 4653].

5. Learned counsel appearing for respondent nos.6 to 8 submitted that the persons specified in Section 11(1)(c) of the Act are also Councillors and, hence, they also have the right to vote at a Special General meeting convened for the purpose of moving a no-confidence motion against the President and Vice President of a Municipal Council.

6. Learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that members of the Lok Sabha and members of the Vidhan Sabha have no right to vote at a Special General meeting convened for the purpose of moving a no-confidence motion as they are not elected Councillors of a Municipal Council.

7. To examine as to whether members of the Lok Sabha and members of the Vidhan Sabha, whose constituencies lie within a municipal area, have voting right at a Special General meeting convened for the purpose of moving a no-confidence motion against the President and Vice President of the Municipal Council, it is relevant to refer to the following provisions of the Act:

“Section 2(6). “Councillor” means any person who is legally a member of a municipal council or Town Panchayat.

Section 11. Constitution of municipal councils: (1) The municipal council shall consist of,—

(a) such number of directly elected councillors specified in column (3) of the table below in respect of the municipal areas specified in the corresponding entries in column (2) thereof, namely:

TABLE

(b) not more than five persons nominated by the Government from amongst the residents of the municipal area and who are.-

(i) persons having special knowledge and experience in municipal administration or matters relating to health, town planning or education; or

(ii) social workers;

(c) the members of the House of the People and the members of the State Legislative Assembly, representing a part or whole of the municipal area whose constituencies lie w