1. On July 13, 2015, the prescribed officer under the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 [hereinafter, referred to as “the Act”], proposed to hold the meeting for election of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Gurupura Grama Panchayat.

2. The prescribed officer under the Act fixed on July 13, 2015, for election of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Gurupura Grama Panchayat.

3. The appellants before us only filed their nominations for the posts of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha respectively. There was no other nomination coming from any other members of the Panchayat.

4. On July 13, 2015, only six members of the Grama Panchayat were present in the meeting. The total members of the Grama Panchayat are twenty eight in number. The prescribed officer did not declare the result, but adjourned the meeting for want of quorum. He issued another notice on July 14, 2015 for election for the posts of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha, fixing July 23, 2015 for such meeting. There was a litigation before this Court, in which this Court directed holding of election to the posts of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of the Grama Panchayat concerned afresh on July 23, 2015.

5. The appellants were aggrieved and, thus, they have filed these appeals, challenging the said direction of the Hon’ble Single Judge.

6. Sri K.Suman, learned advocate, strenuously argued that there was no occasion for the Hon’ble Single Judge to uphold the decision of the prescribed officer for holding fresh election on July 23, 2015.

7. He draws our attention to sub-rule (5) of Rule 8 of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act (Election of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha *of Gram Panchayats) Rules, 1995 [hereinafter, referred to as “the Rules”] and submits that when nomination was made by single candidate, it was only proper for the prescribed authority to declare him to be elected. He submits that there is no concept of quorum in the election of panchayat to Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha in the Rules. He relies upon a decision of the Hon’ble Single Judge of this Court in K.V. Manjula vs. The Prescribed Officer and Assistant executive Engineer, Zilla Panchayat, Engineering Subdivision, Mulabagalu, Kolar District and another [2014 (6) KLJ 602].

8. In K.V.Manjula vs. Prescribed Officer (supra), the Hon’ble Single Judge of this Court held that a conjoint reading of the provisions of Sections 52 and 53 of the Act made it clear that the provisions therein had no application in the matter of election of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha, as the case may be, since the government by issuing the said notification dated July 30, 1998, had made separate rules in the matter of conducting election to the post of Adhyaksha and Upadhayksha of a Grama Panchayat.

9. In the aforesaid background, let us consider the legal position.

10. Sections 45 and 53 of the Act read as under:

“45. Procedure for election of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha on the establishment of Grama Panchayat, etc.

1[(1) The prescribed officer shall after every general election of members of a Grama Panchayat or on its constitution, reconstitution or establishment under this Act and in any case within one month from the date of publication of names of the elected members under subsection (8) of Section 5, [and immediately before the expiry of term of office of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha] and so often as there arises any casual vacancy in the office of the Adhyaksha or Upadhyaksha, call for a meeting of the Grama Panchayat and preside over it, without right to vote, and in such meeting the Adhyaksha or the Upadhyaksha or both, as the case may be, shall be elected.]

(2) Any dispute relating to the validity of the election of a Adhyaksha or Upadhyaksha of Grama Panchayat under this Act shall be decided by the prescribed judicial officer having jurisdiction over the Panchayat area or the major portion of the Panchayat area, whose decision thereon shall be final.”

*** “53. Quorum and procedure.(1) The quorum for a meeting of the Grama Panchayat shall be [onehalf] of the total number