SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Kar) 292

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
N.V. ANJARIA, C.J., KRISHNA S DIXIT, J.
P.Reethi Mune Gowda W/o J. Mune Gowda – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Karnataka – Respondents
Writ Appeal No.1508 of 2023 (LB-RES)
Decided on : 13-06-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :SRI K.N.PHANINDRA, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W SRI B. RAMESH, ADVOCATE
For the Respondent:SMT. PRATHIMA HONNAPURA, AAG A/W SMT. NILOUFER AKBAR, AGA, SRI B.J. SOMAYAJI, ADVOCATE, SRI D.R. RAVISHNAKAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W SRI SARAVANA S., ADVOCATE AND SRI MURALI N, ADVOCATE

IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that the immunity from no-confidence motions under Section 49(1) applies from the date of election of the current officeholder, not the first president.

Headnote:

Interpretation - No-Confidence Motion - Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 - Section 49(1) - The court interpreted the Second Proviso to Section 49(1) to mean that the fifteen-month immunity from no-confidence motions applies from the date of election of the current officeholder, not the first president.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner was elected as President of the Grama Panchayat on 07.03.2023, following the resignation of the previous president. A no-confidence motion was initiated against her, leading to a legal challenge regarding the applicability of the fifteen-month immunity period under Section 49(1) of the Act.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the fifteen-month period for no-confidence motions should be counted from the date of the current president's election, not from the first president's election, thus granting the petitioner immunity from the motion.

Issues: Whether the fifteen-month immunity from no-confidence motions applies from the date of election of the current president or the first president.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the phrase 'his election' in the Second Proviso refers to the current officeholder, thus the immunity period starts from their election date.

Result: The appeal is allowed, and the impugned judgment is set aside.

JUDGMENT :

A neat question of law arises for consideration about the import and applicability of the group of words ‘within the first fifteen months from the date of his election’ occurring in the Second Proviso to Section 49(1) of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993; whether it applies in the case of a new President elected in the middle of the term of the Panchayat replacing the originally elected president to avail the new President immunity from facing no-confidence motion for first fifteen months from the date of ‘his election’.

2. Section 49 of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) deals with motion of no-confidence against Adhyaksha (the President) or Upadhyaksha (the Vice President) of Grama Panchayat.

2.1 The provision is reproduced hereunder to highlight the Second Proviso to Section 49(1) of the Act which is centripetal to the controversy,

    “49. Motion of no-confidence against Adhyaksha or Upadhyaksha of Grama Panchayat. – (1) Every Adhyaksha or Upadhyaksha of Grama Panchayat shall forthwith be deemed to have vacated his office if a resolution expressing want of confidence in him is passed by a majority of not less than two thirds of the total number of members of the Grama Panchayat at a meeting specially convened for the purpose in accordance with the procedure as may be prescribed:

Provided that no such resolution shall be moved unless notice of the resolution is signed by not less than one- half of the total number of members and at least ten days notice has been given of the intention to move the resolution:

Provided further that no resolution expressing want of confidence against an Adhyaksha or Upadhyaksha, shall be moved within the first fifteen months from the date of his election:

Provided also that where a resolution expressing want of confidence in any Adhyaksha or Upadhyaksha has been considered and negatived by a Grama Panchayat a similar resolution in respect of the same Adhyaksha or Upadhyaksha shall not be given notice of, or moved, six months from the date of the decision of the Grama Panchayat.”

2.2 Whether the period of fifteen months is to be counted from the date of election only of the first President or could also be reckoned from the date when new President in the middle of the term assumes office, for such newly elected incumbent.

2.3 It is in this context that the challenge to the judgment and order dated 17.11.2023 passed by learned Single Judge in the writ petition is required to be addressed for its legality.

2.4 Learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition holding that the petitioner had assumed the office from 07.03.2023 and that the prohibition of fifteen months under the Second Proviso would have to be taken into consideration from 27.12.2021 when the election results were declared, and that since fifteen months expired on 26.05.2023 counted from the date 27.12.2021 when the first President was elected, there was no prohibition for moving the no-confidence motion.

3. The prayer made in the writ petition was to set aside the notice dated 04.11.2023 issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Bengaluru North Sub-Division, Bengaluru. It was a notice in relation to the motion of no-confidence against the President of the Bagaluru Grama Panchayat, Yelahanka Taluk. This notice came to be issued by the Competent Authority pursuant to the application dated 18.10.2023 submitted by 20 members of the Grama Panchayat, who had submitted motion of no-confidence against the President. The Competent Authority required for holding of meeting on 21.11.2023 to discuss the motion of no-confidence against the President.

3.1 The petitioner was elected as member of respondent No.3-Gram Panchayat. The election to the Gram Panchayat was held and the tenure was from the year 2020 to the year 2025. The Panchayat consisted of 26 elected members. One Smt. Hameeda was elected as President of the Board of the Panchayat for a period of thirty months as per

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top