Back
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
B.VEERAPPA
SHRI. G KARUNAKARAN – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WP/52420/2019
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA
WRIT PETITION No.52420/2019(GM-CC)
BETWEEN:
SHRI. G. KARUNAKARAN
S/O LATE GOVINDAN,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
COUNCILLOR, WARD NO.22
(SWARNA WARD)
R/A ‘PADMALAYA’, VIVEK NAGAR,
ROBERTSONPET, K.G.F.,
KOLAR-563122.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI RAGUPATHY K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE,
M. S. BUILDING, VIKASA SOUDHA,
AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BANGALORE-560001.
2
2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
KOLAR DISTRICT,
KOLAR-563101.
3 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
KOLAR SUB DIVISION, KOLAR,
KOLAR-563101.
4 . THE TAHSILDAR
K. G. F. TALUK,
ROBERTSONPET,
KGF, KOLAR-563122.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI C. JAGADISH, SPECIAL COUNSEL)
****
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO THE NOTICE
DATED 02.12.2019 INITIATED BY THE R-3 PRODUCED AS
ANNEXURE-A ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R
The petitioner in the present writ petition has sought
for writ of certiorari to quash the proceedings pursuant to
the notice dated 2.12.2019 issued by the 3rd respondent
bearing case No.ADM.CR/15/2019-20 as per Annexure-A.
3
2. It is the case of the petitioner that originally he
belongs to Adi Dravida (Scheduled Caste) by birth. His
parents, his brothers and their kids and also the kids of the
petitioner had obtained Adi Dravida (Scheduled Caste)
certificate. Further, the caste of the petitioner’s father has
been reflected as Adi Dravida (Scheduled Caste) in his
service records. Even the petitioner’s mother had also
obtained Adi Karnataka (Scheduled Caste) caste certificate
in the year 1990. Further, the school records of the
petitioner and his brothers also reflect their caste as Adi
Dravida (Scheduled Caste). The petitioner thereafter
obtained the manual caste certificate issued by the 4th
respondent and had filed his nomination from the Geetha
ward reserved for Scheduled Caste for the Councillor
elections held on 2001. The petitioner thereafter had
obtained the Adi Dravida (Scheduled Caste) caste certificate
from the 4th respondent issued for life time and he had also
further obtained the Adi Dravida (Scheduled Caste)
4
certificate issued for election purpose on 25.10.2019.
Thereafter, the petitioner filed his nomination from Ward
No.22 (Swarna Nagar Ward) reserved for Scheduled Caste
for the post of Councillor and was duly elected on
24.11.2019. Shri N. Harish Babu who had lost elections
against the petitioner from Ward No.22 had filed a false
complaint before the 4th respondent which was forwarded to
the 3rd respondent on 2.12.2019. The 3rd respondent
without verifying the genuineness of the allegations and
though there were no supporting documents in support of
the allegations made in the complaint, had blindly issued
the notice to the petitioner as per Annexure-A dated
2.12.2019. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court
for the relief sought for.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties to
the lis.
5
4. Sri Raghupathy .K, learned counsel for the
petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the writ petition
contended that the impugned notice issued by the 3rd
respondent is totally without jurisdiction and cannot be
sustained. He would further contend that the caste
certificate issued by the jurisdictional authorities in favour
of the petitioner has reached finality and the said certificate
is used only for the purpose of election. Therefore, the
Assistant Commissioner ought not to have issued the
impugned notice. Therefore, he sought to allow the writ
petition.
5. Per contra, Sr
