IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.2350 OF 2023 (LB-RES)

BETWEEN:

SMT. RADHAMMA W/O PADMANABHA REDDY AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/A KADIRAMPALLI VILLAGE BALTMARI POST, SRINIVASAPURA TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT-563134 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAHUL S REDDY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYAT RAJ, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001 Digitally signed by SUMA 2. THE KARNATAKA UPALOKAYUKTA, Location:

REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA, KARNATAKA MULTI STORIED BUILDING DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001

3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR AND AUTHORISED CHIEF SECRETARY (GRAMA PANCHAYAT)

DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYAT RAJ MULTI STORIED BUILDING, 3^RD FLOOR, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001

4. THE REGIONAL COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE DIVISION, 2^ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, K.H. ROAD SHANTI NAGAR, BENGALURU-560027 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. BOPANNA, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1, 3 AND 4 (VAKALATH NOT FILED);

SRI. VENKATESH ARABATTI, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2 (VAKALATH NOT FILED)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 08.03.2022 PASSED BY THE 1^ST RESPONDENT IN CASE NO.GRa.Aa.Pa/560/GRa.Pam.Aa/2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-L.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has challenged the order bearing PÀqÀvÀ ¸ÀASÉå:

UÁæC¥À 560 UÁæ¥ÀAC 2020 dated 08.03.2022 passed by the respondent No.1 under Sections 43-A and 48(4) of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (for short, ‘the Act, 1993’), by which she was disqualified from contesting election for a period of six years from the date of the order.

2. The petitioner was the President of the Yarramvaripalli Grama Panchayat (henceforth referred to as ‘the Panchayat’). An application was filed by an RTI activist seeking details of the spending in the 13^th Financial Plan between 01.04.2014 to 17.07.2015. Smt. S. Shantha Kumari - Panchayat Development Officer issued only bank statement. The RTI activist filed a complaint with the respondent No.2 against the PDO for not furnishing the full details. A notice was issued to the PDO calling for her explanation. The PDO submitted a 23 page report wherein she denied the allegations made against her by the RTI activist. The RTI activist submitted a rejoinder to the objections stating that the PDO did not produce the vouchers for spending a sum of Rs.21,29,792/- between 19.08.2014 and 31.08.2015. Though the PDO reported that the entire amount was spent, the respondent No.2, which was seized of the complaint filed by the RTI activist, came to the conclusion that there was a possibility of misappropriation of funds as alleged by the complainant during 19.08.2014 to 31.08.2015 when the petitioner was the President of the Panchayat.

3. The Lokayukta then launched a proceeding against the petitioner as well as the Panchayat Development Officers, namely, Sri N. Ramappa, Sri Nagaraju, and Sri Byreddy. The petitioner purportedly submitted all the documents in support of the spending in the 13^th financial plan. However, the respondent No.2 came to the conclusion that money was paid illegally by Panchayat to students as well as physically challenged persons. It was alleged that as against the circular of the State Government dated 22.07.2015 allowing the Panchayat to pay Rs.1,500/- for scheduled caste and scheduled tribe students, it had paid a sum of Rs.5,000/-. Likewise, a sum of Rs.6,000/- was paid to two physically challenged persons, namely, Sri Manjunath, son of late Sri Erappa, Sri Narasimhappa, son of late Sri Kadirappa, without obtaining disability certificates. Therefore, the respondent No.1 directed initiation of proceedings against