IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Alok Aradhe, S. Vishwajith Shetty, JJ.
Sri. Lakshmikanta K & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
The State of Karnataka & Ors. - Respondents
W.P. No. 4457 of 2022 (Lb-Ele)
Decided On : 18-04-2022
Voting Rights - Nominated Councilors - Karnataka Municipalities Act,1964 - Article 243-R(2)(a) - Section 11(1)(b) - Section 42(2) - Rules 3, 4, 8 - Meeting for Election of President and Vice-President - Validity of Proviso - Constitutional Validity - Right to Vote - Distinction between Elected and Nominated Members
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, nominated councilors of Malur Town Municipal Council, sought the right to vote in the election for the post of President/ Vice President under Section 42(2) of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964. They challenged the validity of Section 11(1)(b) of the Act and the Constitutional validity of proviso to Article 243-R(2)(a) of the Constitution of India, claiming it violated Article 14 and the basic structure of the Constitution.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the nominated and elected members cannot be treated as belonging to the same class, and there was no unreasonable differentiation between them. The right to vote is not a fundamental right, and Article 243R(2)(a) does not violate the basic structure of the Constitution. The challenge to the validity of Article 243R(2)(a) and Section 11(1)(b) failed, and the petition was dismissed.
Issues: Validity of Section 11(1)(b) of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 and the Constitutional validity of proviso to Article 243-R(2)(a) of the Constitution of India. Right of nominated councilors to vote in the election for the post of President/ Vice President.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the distinction between elected and nominated members, holding that the right to vote is not a fundamental right and that there was no unreasonable differentiation between them. The court also noted the absence of pleading on the violation of the basic structure of the Constitution, leading to the rejection of the challenge to Article 243R(2)(a).
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed as the court found no merit in the challenge to the validity of Section 11(1)(b) of the Act and the Constitutional validity of proviso to Article 243-R(2)(a) of the Constitution of India.
ORDER
1. The petitioners who are nominated councilors of Malur Town Municipal Council (hereinafter referred to as 'the Council' for short) in this petition have prayed for the following reliefs:
(i) Call for records pertaining to Letter bearing NO.ELN/CR/32/2020-21 dated 22.12.2021 issued by the 2nd respondent (Annexure C)
(ii) Declare that the petitioners as nominated councilors are entitled to cast their vote in the election for the post of President/ Vice President under Section 42(2) of the Karnataka Municipalities Act,1964
(iii) Declare that the votes cast by the Petitioners in election held on 30.12.2021 for the post of President in Respondent No.3 Council as valid and sustainable in law. In the alternative
(iv) Declare that the proviso to Section 11(1) (b) of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 is ultra vires Article 14 of the Constitution of India and is unconstitutional.
Or read down the proviso to Section 11(1)(b) of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 as not applying to elections to the post of President and Vice-President of the Municipal Council held under Section 42(2) of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 and the rules framed thereunder.
(v) Declare that the proviso to Article 243-R (2)(a) of the Constitution of India is ultra vires Article 14 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the basic structure of the Constitution.
Or read down the proviso to Article 243-R (2)(a) of the Constitution as not applying to the post of President and the vice president of the Municipal Council held under Section 42(2) of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 and the rules framed there under.
(vi) Declare that the Petitioners are entitled to participate and cast their vote in the election for the post of President, Malur Town Municipal Corporation by virtue of being nominated councilors of the Malur Town Municipal Council under the provisions of Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964.
(vii) Grant cost of these proceedings; and
(viii) Pass such orders or directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. The Council was constituted on 20.05.2018, which has 29 elected members as well as 4 nominated members and one member of Legislative Assembly. The President of the Council was elected on 20.11.2020. The petitioners were nominated as Councilors of the Council on 27.02.2021. The Tahsildar and Election Officer issued calendar of events by which election to the post of President of the Council was notified and the same was scheduled to be held on 30.12.2021.The petitioners who are the nominated members of the Council, filed a writ petition, in which inter alia declaration was sought to the effect that they are entitled to participate in the process of election to the post of President of the Council. A bench of this court by an interim order dated 29.12.2021 permitted the petitioners to participate in the process of election for the post of President of the Council subject to final decision of the writ petition.
3. An election was held on 30.12.2021, in which the petitioners cast their votes for the election to the post of the President of the Council. The petitioner in WP No.834/2022 filed an I.A. for impleading on 10.01.2022 in W.P.No.24308/2021, filed by the petitioners. The petitioner in WP No.834/2022 thereafter withdrew the interlocutory application for impleading on 07.02.2022. Thereafter, a bench of this court vide order dated 22.02.2022 permitted the petitioners in W.P.No.24308/2021 to withdraw the writ petition with the liberty as prayed for and extended the interim order for a period of 7 days. In the aforesaid factual background, this petition has been filed.
4. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners who are nominated councilors of Malur Town Municipal Council have assailed the validity of section 11(1)(b) of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 as well as the Constitutional validity of proviso to Article 243-R(2)(a) of the Constitution of India
People's Union For Civil Liberties vs. Union of India
PUCL And Anr. vs. Union of India (2004) 2 SCC 476
Rohitash Kumar VS. Om Prakash Sharma
Shamrao Vishnu Perulekar vs. District Shamroa Perulekar
State of Haryana vs. State of Punjab (2004) 12 SCC 673
State of UP vs. Kartar Singh AIR 1964 SC 1135
Ankul Chandra Pradhan vs. Union of India
Arasmeta Capitve Power Co. (P) Ltd vs. Lafarge India (P) Ltd
Ashwani Kumar Singh vs. U.P. Public Service Commission
Charanjit Lal Chowdhuri vs. Union of India and Others
Dadi Jagannadham vs. Jammulu Ramulu
Government of AP vs. P Laxmi Devi
Jullundur Rubber Goods Manufacturers'association vs. The Union of India and Ors. AIR 1970 SC 1589
Jyoti Pershad vs. The Administrator For The Union Territory of Delhi And Ors.
Kalabharati Advertising vs. Hemant Vimalnath Narichania & Ors. (2010) 9 SCC 437
Krishena Kumar vs. Union of India
M Nagraj And Others vs. Union of India And Others
Point of Law : Proviso to Article 243R(2) does not apply to the election of Chairperson of Municipality concerned, the same also does not deserve acceptance, as the proviso specifically bars the nomi....
The court emphasized the limited scope of judicial review of executive action and upheld the discretion of the government to nominate individuals with special knowledge or experience in municipal adm....
Respondent-State Government is required to hold elections to the Nelamangala CMC and reconstitute Council in terms of Section 358 of Act. Since it has been noticed by this Court that the process of d....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the doctrine of reading down to align statutory provisions with the constitutional mandate, as well as the interpretation of con....
The reservation for women in the Municipality Act includes all categories of women, irrespective of whether they are from exclusively reserved seats or unreserved seats.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.