JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. These petitions have been filed pro bono publico. The grievance of the petitioner in W.P.No.18278/2021 pertains to appointment of one Mr.S.R.Vishwanath, Member of Legislative Assembly from Yelahanka Assembly Constituency as Chairman (hereinafter referred to as 'the Chairman', for short) of Bangalore Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'the Authority' for short). In W.P. No.19421/2021, the petitioner seeks a mandamus to the State Government to take time bound action for disqualifying the Chairman in terms of Article 191(1)(a) of the Constitution of India from holding the post of Chairman of Authority which is an office of profit.

2. The controversy involved in these petitions lie in a narrow compass. The petitioner is an advocate by avocation. Sec. 3 of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the 'BDA Act' for short) deals with constitution and incorporation of the Authority. Sec. 3(5) of the BDA Act provides that the Chairman, the Engineer Member and Finance Member and the Town Planner Member shall be whole time members and the other members shall be part time members. According to the petitioner, the Chairman who is a sitting MLA from Yelahanka Constituency cannot be whole time member of the Authority and therefore, is ineligible to hold the post. In addition, the grievance as pleaded in writ petition namely W.P. No.18278/2021 that no method of appointment has been prescribed for appointment to the posts of Engineer, Finance and Town Planner Members of the Authority. In the said writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the notification dtd. 24/11/2020 by which the Chairman has been appointed as Chairman of the Authority.

3. The petitioner also seeks a writ of quo warranto prohibiting Chairman and respondent Nos.5 to 7 from performing the duties of the post of Chairman, Engineer, Finance and the Town Planner Members of the Authority. The petitioner also seeks a writ of mandamus to constitute and incorporate the Authority in accordance with Sec. 3 of the BDA Act after framing the Rules and guidelines.

4. Under Article 192 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has raised issue of disqualification of the Chairman by filing a petition on 4/10/2021 before His Excellency the Governor. Thereafter, on 26/10/2021, W.P.No.19421/2021 has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus to take a time bound action to disqualify the Chairman from continuing as Member of Legislative Assembly in 15th Karnataka Legislative Assembly in terms of Article 191(1)(a) of the Constitution of India for holding the post of Chairman of the Authority.

5. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that Chairman is a Member of Legislative Assembly from Yelahanka Constituency and therefore, cannot be a full time member of the Authority in view of Sec. 3(5) of the BDA Act. It is further submitted that merely because respondent No.4 is MLA, he is not eminently qualified to be appointed as Chairman. It is also submitted no method has been prescribed for selection of Engineer, Finance and Town Planner Members of the Authority and appointment to the aforesaid posts has to be made through a process of selection. It is urged that respondent Nos.5 to 7 have not been appointed in a manner known to law.

6. It is further urged that BDA is not the Committee as defined under Sec. 2(a) of the Karnataka Legislature (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred as 'the 1956 Act'). It is pointed out that even though petitioner had approached His Excellency the Governor, till today, he has not received any response. In support of aforesaid submissions, reliance has been placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in CENTRE FOR PIL AND ANOTHER Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER,(2011) 4 SCC 1.

7. Learned Advocate General has submitted that the Authority is the Committee as defined under Sec. 2(a) of 1956 Act and referred to in Sec. 3 of the BDA Act and the Chairman is not disqualified to hold