Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 27, Cited by 10]

Karnataka High Court

M Abdul Azeez vs The State Of Karnataka on 6 January, 2014

Author: H.G.Ramesh

Bench: H.G.Ramesh

                              1




 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

       DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF JANUARY 2014
                                                             R
                         BEFORE

         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.G.RAMESH

     WRIT PETITION Nos.38256/2013 (LB-RES), 39203 &
       39629, 39421, 39786-789, 40835, 38713, 39015,
             39941, 43581, 45374 & 45855-857,
     38395-401 (LB-ELE), 38822 (LB-RES), 38996, 39002,
      39219, 39284-285, 39353, 39665-666, 40245-247,
           41309, 41809, 47293 OF 2013 (LB-ELE)
IN WP No.38256/2013

BETWEEN:

M.ABDUL AZEEZ
S/O K.MOHAMMED
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
R/O DOOR NO.8-14-1241
ARIF MANZIL
KARBALA ROAD, KUDROLI
MANGALORE - 575 003                         ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI JAYAKUMAR S. PATIL, SR. ADVOCATE A/W
    SRI DEVI PRASAD SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.      THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
        BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
        URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
        M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 003

2.      DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
        MANGALORE DISTRICT
        MANGALORE - 575 001

3.      MANGALORE CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
        LALBAGH, MANGALORE - 560 003
        BY ITS COMMISSIONER
                             2



4.    BELGAUM CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
      BELLARY - 560 010
      BY ITS COMMISSIONER

5.    BELLARY CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
      BELLARY- 560 003
      BY ITS COMMISSIONER

6.    DAVANGERE CITY MUNILCIPAL CORPORATION
      OPP. TO RAILWAY STATION
      DAVANGERE - 577 556
      BY ITS COMMISSIONER

7.    GULBARGA CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
      GULBARGA - 585 303
      BY ITS COMMISSIONER

8.    HUBLI-DHARWAD CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
      LAMINTON ROAD
      HUBLI - 580 020
      BY ITS COMMISSIONER

9.    MYSORE CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
      MYSORE - 577 103
      BY ITS COMMISSIONER

10.   G. JAYALALITHA
      W/O K.G. GOPIKRISHNA
      AGE: 27 YEARS
      R/A 56/2, WARD NO.14
      ROOPANA GUDI NARAPPA STREET
      MILLPET, BELLARY - 583 101     ... RESPONDENTS


(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR, ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA FOR R-1 & R-2;
    SRI S. VISWAJITH SHETTY, ADVOCATE. FOR R-3;
    SRI A. NIRANJAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-4;
    SRI P.S.MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R-7;
    SRI I.G. GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R-8;
    SRI H.C.SHIVARAMU, ADVOCATE FOR R9;
    SRI K. CHANDRANATH ARIGA, ADVOCATE FOR R-10;
    NOTICE TO R-5 DISPENSED WITH V/O DTD.5.11.2013;
    R-6 SERVED)
                                3



      WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-C
DATED 21.8.2013 IN NO.UDD 118 MLR 2013, BANGALORE,
ISSUED BY R-1 AND DIRECT THE R-1 TO ALLOT GENERAL FOR
THE POST OF MAYOR BY WAY OF RESERVATION AS PER THE
ROTATION SYSTEM AS CONTEMPLATED UNDER ARTICLE
243T(4) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND AS PER THE
GUIDELINES ISSUED BY THE R-1 AS PER ANNEXURE -C.

IN WP Nos.39203 & 39629/2013

BETWEEN:

1.     SRI T.C. GANGADHAR
       @ T.C. GANGU (@ TARAKARI GANGU)
       S/O T.S.CHANDRU
       AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
       RESIDING YELLAMMADEVARA
       TEMPLE ROAD
       KOTE, TIPTUR
       TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 105

2.     SRI M.S.YOGEESH
       S/O M.B.SHIVAIAH
       AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
       RESIDING AT 4TH MAIN ROAD
       K.R.EXTENSION, TIPUR
       TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 105         ... PETITIONERS

(BY SRI B.M. SIDDAPPA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     STATE OF KARNATAKA
       BY ITS SECRETARY
       DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
       DEVELOPMENT
       M.S.BUILDING
       BANGALORE - 560 001

2.     STATE ELECTION COMMISSIONER
       KARNATAKA STATE
       DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
       BANGALORE - 560 001
                             4



3.   DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
     TUMKUR DISTRICT
     TUMKUR - 572 105

4.   THE COMMISSIONER
     TIPTUR CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
     TIPTUR
     TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 105

5.   SMT. D. GEETHA
     COUNCILLOR - WARD NO.22
     TIPTUR CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
     TIPTUR - 577 122

6.   SMT. S. REKHA
     COUNCILLOR - WARD NO.14
     TIPTUR CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
     TIPTUR - 577 122                ... RESPONDENTS
     (AMENDED V/O DATED 5.11.2013)

(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA FOR R-1 & R-3;
    SRI K N PANINDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2;
    SRI G.R. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R5 & R6;
    R-4 SERVED)

     THESE WPs ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH         THE
NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 BEARING
No.UDD 117 MLR 2013 (1) BANGALORE, DATED 23.8.2013
PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE DATED 23.8.2013 VIDE
ANNEXURE- B AND ETC.,

IN WP No.39421/2013

BETWEEN:

AMANULLA KHAN
S/O KHASIM KHAN
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
MEMBER OF CITY MUNCIPAL COUNCIL
UPKAR GROUPS, GADIBAN MOHALLA
SIRA TALUK
TUMKUR DISTRICT                         ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI A.P. PATIL ADVOCATE)
                                 5



AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
       URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
       M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 003

2.     DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
       TUMKUR DISTRICT
       TUMKUR - 572 003

3.     TASILDHAR
       SHIRA TALUK
       TUMKUR - 572 003

4.     SHIRA TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
       SHIRA BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER
       TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 003

5.     SMT. GNYANAPOORNA
       W/O SHIVANNA
       MEMBER OF CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
       SANTHEPETE
       SHIRA TOWN
       TUMKUR DISTRICT

6.     P. SRINIVAS
       S/O PILLAPPA
       R/A JAIBHEEMA NAGAR
       CHIKKABALLAPUR TOWN

7.     SMT. NAGARATHNA
       W/O YATHISH
       R/A NO.391
       BEHIND RAGHAVENDRASWAMY
       TEMPLE, 16TH WARD
       CHIKKABALLAPUR TOWN

8.     C.M.SRINIVASA REDDY
       S/O CHIKKA MUNISHAMAPPA
       R/A NO.1810-A, 25TH WARD
       G.N.V. ROAD, YELEPETE
       CHIKKABALLAPUR TOWN

9.     SMT. C.J.BHARATHI DEVI
       W/O C.N.GANGARAJU
                                   6



        R/A NO.43/3
        DODDA BHAJANE MANE ROAD
        WARD NO.25, CHIKKABALLAPUR

10.     K.V. MANJUNATH
        S/O K.C.VENKATAPATHI
        AGED 39 YEARS
        NO.2272, T.G. TANK ROAD
        CHIKKABALLAPURA TOWN

11.     RAMESH BABU
        S/O LATE VENKATASWAMY
        AGED 44 YEARS
        NO.1217, KANDAVARAPETE
        CHICKBALLAPURA TOWN

12.     SMT. LAKSHMI
        W/O A. SRINIVAS
        AGE: 34 YEARS
        No.693, VENKATENAHALLI ROAD
        KARKAHANEPETE
        CHICKBALLAPURA TOWN

13.     SMT. S LEELAVATHI
        W/O SRINIVAS B A
        AGED 43 YEARS
        5TH CROSS, 29TH WARD
        CHAMARAJAPETE
        CHIKKABALLAPURA TOWN            ... RESPONDENTS

        (AMENDED V/O DTD. 8.11.2013)

(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA FOR R-1 & R-3;
    SRI VIJAY KUMAR Y. H, ADVOCATE FOR R-5;

      SRI G.D. ASWATHANARAYANA, ADVOCATE FOR R-6 TO R-9
      SRI SUBRAMANYA R, ADVOCATE FOR R10 TO R-13;
      NOTICE TO R-4 DISPENSED WITH)

     WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE -C
DATED 23.8.2013 IN NO.UDD 117 MLR 2013(1), BANGALORE
ISSUED BY R-1 AND DIRECT THE R-1 TO ALLOT GENERAL FOR
THE POST OF PRESIDENT AS RESERVATION AS PER THE
ROTATION SYSTEM AS CONTEMPLATED UNDER ARTICLE
                              7



243T(4) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND AS PER THE
GUIDELINES ISSUED BY THE R-1 AS PER ANNEXURE -C.

IN WP Nos.39786-39789/2013

BETWEEN:

1.   ZABHI ULLAKHAN GHORI
     S/O LATE BURHAN KHAN GHORI
     AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
     MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FORM PETECHERI
     WARD NO.27
     CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
     RESISING AT NO.10/C
     OPPOSITE JANATHA SAW MILL, SHA COLONY
     CHANNAPATTANA TOWN
     RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

2.   LOKESH S/O LATE CHIKKALINGEGOWDA
     AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
     MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM
     HALASINAMARADA DODDI, WARD NO.31
     CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
     RESIDING AT NO.625, MIG, KHB COLONY
     CHANNAPATTANA TOWN
     RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

3.   P. MADHU S/O LATE N.A.PRABHAKAR
     AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
     MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM FORT
     WARD NO.12, CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
     RESIDING AT NO.1576, R.K.GATE
     NARAYANAGOWDARA BEEDHI, FORT
     CHANNAPATTANA TOWN
     RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

4.   M.N. RAMESH BABU
     S/O M.T. NARAYANASWAMY
     AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
     MUNILCIPAL COUNCILOR FROM MANGALAVARAPETE
     WARD NO.5, CHANNAPATNA CITYMUNICIPALITY
                               8



       RESIDING AT NO.1907, 12TH CROSS
       MANGALAVARAPETE
       CHANNAPATTANA TOWN
       RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160     ... PETITIONERS

(BY SRI M.R. RAJAGOPAL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY
       TO GOVERNMENT
       URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
       VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 001

2.     CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER
       NIRVACHANA BHAVANA
       MAHARANI COLLEGE CIRCLE
       BANGALORE - 560 001

3.     THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
       RAMANAGARA DISTRICT, RAMANAGARA - 571 511

4.     THE CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
       CHANNAPATNA
       REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER
       CHANNAPATNA
       RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

5.     SMT. MANJULA, W/O ASHOK
       AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
       MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM CHIKKAMALURU
       WARD NO.1
       CHANNAPATTANA CITY MUICIPALITY
       RESIDENT OF CHIKKAMALURU
       CHANNAPATNA TOWN
       RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

6.     K. SHASHIKUMAR
       S/O RAMAKRISHNAIAH
       AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
       MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM
       MANGALAVARAPETE
       WARD NO.2
       CHANNAPATTANA CITY MUNICIPALITY
       RESIDING AT NO.1710, 14TH CROSS
                              9



      MANGALAVARAPETE
      CHANNAPATTANA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

7.    SMT. SHWETHA W/O GOPALAKRISHNA
      AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM MANGALAVARAPETE
      WARD NO.3, CHANNAPATTANA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT NO.1753, 14TH CROSS
      MANGALAVARAPETE
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

8.    M.N.SHANKAR S/O NAGARAJ
      AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNICILOR FROM
      MANGALAVARAPETE
      WARD NO.4
      CHANNAPATTANA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT NO.1968, 10TH CROSS
      MANGALAVARAPETE
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

9.    V. RAMU, S/O VENKATAPPA
      AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM
      AVARTHIPURA, WARD NO.6
      CHANNAPATTANA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT NO. 2240/25, 4TH CROSS
      KUVEMPU NAGARA
      CHANNAPATTANA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

10.   VISHAKANTAMURTHY S/O NANJAPPA
      AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM SHETTHALLI
      WARD NO.7, CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT N. SHETTHALLI, CHURCH STREET
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

11.   SMT. LAKSHMAMMA
      W/O D HUCHAIAH
      AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM MAHALAKSHMI
                              10



      EXTENSION, WARD NO.8
      CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT NO.268/1, 1ST CROSS
      AMBEDKAR NAGARA, CHANNAPATTANA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

12.   B. VENKATESH
      S/O BORALINGAIAH
      AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM FORT
      WARD NO.9
      CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT NO.1563/19, 1ST CROSS
      MARUTHI EXTENSION
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

13.   S. UMASHANKAR S/O SINGRIGOWDA
      AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM
      FORT, WARD NO.10, CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY,
      RESIDING AT NO.1289/a, 6TH CROSS
      KUVEMPU NAGARA (NORTH) FORT
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

14.   SMT. NAZMUNNISA W/O SHOYAB
      AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM FORT
      WARD NO.11, CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT NO./1301, BABU RAO STREET
      FORT, CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

15.   SMT. KHURSHEED UNNISA
      W/O SYED KHALEEL
      AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM FORT
      WARD NO.13, CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT NO.1076, KALAMMA TEMPLE ROAD
      FORT, CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

16.   B.P.MUDDUKRISHNEGOWDA
      S/O PUTTASWAMYGOWDA
      AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM ELEKERI
                             11



      WARD NO.14, CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT ELEKERI
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

17.   S. KIRAN, S/O SIDDAPPAJI
      AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM ELEKERI
      WARD NO.15, CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT ELEKERI, (HOSTEL ROAD)
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

18.   M. MANJUNATHA S/O LATE MASANNA
      AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM HARIJANA
      COLONY GANESH TEMPLE
      WARD NO.16, CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT NO.17, CHURCH ROAD
      H.B.CROSS
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

19.   SMT. SARALA W/O MANOHARA
      AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM CHITTARAGERI
      WARD NO.17, CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT NO.134A, MEDARA BEEDHI
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

20.   JAKI AHMED KHAN S/O FAYAZ AHMED KHAN
      AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM KUMBARAGERI
      WARD NO. 18, CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT NO.397, SAYYEDWADI
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

21.   LIYAKHATH ALI KHAN S/O NAZEER ALIKHAN
      AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM THIPPUNAGARA
      WARD NO.19, CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT NO. TIPPUNAGARA
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160
                              12



22.   HAMID MUNAVARA S/O ARIFF MUNAVAR
      AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM HANUMANTHANAGARA
      WARD NO.20, CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT NO.687/1 PATHAN WADI
      CHITTARAGERI CROSS
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

23.   SMT. SYEEDA KHUBRABANU W/O SYED AKBAR
      AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM SYBBADAGERI
      WARD NO.21, CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT NO.365, C.K.ROAD CROSS, S.M.STREET
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

24.   SMT. UJMA ISHRATH W/O FARID KHAN GHORI
      AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM KULUME BEEDHI
      WARD NO. 22, CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT NO.880, MADEEN SQUARE
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

25.   SMT. KHAMMAR NIZAMI
      W/O AKRAM USMANI
      AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM FOUZDAR BEEDI
      WARD NO. 23, CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT NO.MUDUNAGALAYYA BEEDI
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

26.   SMT. AKHILA BANU W/O FAYA AHMED KHAN
      AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM ISLAMPURA
      WARD NO. 24, CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT NO.1493, ISLAMPURA MOHALLA
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

27.   BHAVASA S/O BIJJO SAHEB
      AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM
      WARD NO. 25, CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
                              13



      RESIDING AT NO.1567, NIZAMI SQUARE CROSS
      SALAMULLA MOHALLA
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

28.   SYED HAASIM S/O LATE SYED MIYA
      AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM SIRAJ MOHALLA
      WARD NO. 26, CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT NO.790, KINATH MOHALLA
      MADIN CHOWKA CROSS
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

29.   SMT. FARZAN BANO W/O MOHAMMED ARIFF
      AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM THATTEKERE
      WARD NO. 28, CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT NO.1287/18A, YLADGAR MOHALLA
      ZEEMPURA
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

30.   WILSON S/O NATESH @ NETHALIN
      AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM ANANDAPURA
      WARD NO. 29, CHANNAPATNA CITY MUNICIPALITY
      RESIDING AT 2ND CROSS ANANDAPURA
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160

31.   C.K.NANDEESHA S/O KALAYYA
      AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
      MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR FROM HALASINAMARADA
      DODDI, WARD NO.30, CHANNAPATNA CITY
      MUNICIPALITY, RESIDING AT 1ST CROSS
      HALASINAMARADA DODDI
      CHANNAPATNA TOWN
      RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160     ... RESPONDENTS

(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA FOR R-1 & R-3;
    SRI A.V.GANGADARAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R4;
    R-2, R-5 TO R-31 SERVED)
                              14



     WPs ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED
NOTIFICATION  BEARING    NO.UDD   117    MLR  2013(1),
BANGALORE DT.23.8.13, ISSUED BY THE R1, MAKING
RESERVATIONS FOR THE POST OF PRESIDENT & VICE
PRESIDENT OF THE R4 MUNICIPALITY FOR THE 7TH TERM
PRODUCED AS ANN-E INSOFAR AS SL.NO.7 IS CONCERNED BY
DECLARING THE SAME AS VIOLATIVE OF SECTION 42 OF THE
KARNATAKA MUNICIPALITIES ACT 1964 & RULE 13 OF THE
KARNATAKA MUNICIPALITIES (PRESIDENT & VICE PRESIDENT)
ELECTION RULES 1965 AND ETC.,

IN WP.NO.40835/2013

BETWEEN:

SMT. SAVITHA ANANDAM B
W/O ANANDAM B
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
COUNCILLOR, WARD NO.20
CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
CHICKMAGALUR                            ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI J.N.NAVEEN, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
       URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
       KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT
       VIKASA SOUDHA
       BANGALORE - 560 001

2.     THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
       CHICKMAGALUR
       CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT - 572 102 ... RESPONDENTS

(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA FOR R1 & R-2)

     WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO         QUASH THE
GUIDELINES DATED 4.5.13 IN NO.UDD 37 MLR 2013 ISSUED
BY R1 VIDE ANNX-D AS THE SAME IS ULTRA-VIRUS,
                               15



UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND CONTRARY TO THE ACT UNDER
SECTION 42(2-A) AND ALSO CONTRARY TO THE ART 243-T OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND ETC.,

IN WP No.38713/2013

BETWEEN:

SMT. CHANDRAKALA NAGARAJ
W/O K.C.NAGARAJ
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
MEMBER, TOWN PANCHAYATH
HOSANAGARA
SHIMOGA DISTRICT - 577 201              ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI A. NAGARAJAPPA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
       DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT
       KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT
       VIKASA SOUDHA
       DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
       BANGALORE - 560 001

2.     THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
       SHIMOGA DISTRICT
       SHIMOGA - 577 201

3.     THE TAHSILDAR
       HOSANAGARA TALUK
       HOSANAGARA - 577 202

4.     H.L.UMESH
       S/O H.T. LOKAPPA GOWDA       AMENDED V/O
       AGED 36 YEARS                DATED
       SHIMOGA ROAD                 5.11.2013
       HOSANAGARA TALUK
       SHIMOGA DISTRICT               ... RESPONDENTS


(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA R-1 TO 3;
    SRI SANDESH T.B, ADVOCATE FOR R-4)
                              16




      WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
GUIDELINES DATED 4.5.2013 IN NO.UDD.73.MLR.2013 ISSUED
BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-K AND QUASH THE
RESERVATION/ALLOTMENT       MADE    IN   FAVOUR     OF
HOSANAGARA TOWN PANCHAYAT IN FAVOUR OF PRESIDENT,
GENERAL CATEGORY AND VICE-PRESIDENT, BCB WOMAN AT
ITEM NO.21 OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 23.8.2013 IN
NO.UDD.117.MLR.2013(3) ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
VIDE ANNEXURE -E.

IN WP NO.39015/2013

BETWEEN:

SHABNAM W/O JABHIR HUSSAIN
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
R/AT GANDHINAGAR, SEEBINAKERE POST
THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIMOGGA            ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI PRAKASHA HEGDE K, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     STATE OF KARNATAKA
       REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO
       GOVERNMENT, URBAN DEVELOPMENT
       DEPARTMENT
       M.S.BUILDING
       BANGALORE - 560 001

2.     TAHASILDAR
       THIRTHAHALLI TALUK
       SHIMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 601    ... RESPONDENTS

(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA)

     WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
NOTIFICATION DATED 23.08.2013 IN No.UDD117MLR2013(3)
BANGALORE ISSUED BY THE R1 IN SO FAR AS THIRTHAHALLI
TOWN PANCHAYATH ANNEXURE -D.
                                17



IN WP No.39941/2013

BETWEEN:

SMT. NAGAMMA
WIFE OF BASAVA NAIKA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
MEMBER OF VIRAJPET
TOWN PANCHAYAT
MEENPET, VIRAJPET POST - 571 218
KODAGU DISTRICT                              ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI M.G.S. KAMAL FOR
    M/S. KAMAL & BANU, ADVOCATES)

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT
       REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
       VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 001

2.     THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
       KODAGU DISTRICT, MADIKERI - 571 201

3.     THE TAHSILDAR
       VIRAJPET SUB DIVISION
       VIRAJPET - 571 218              ... RESPONDENTS

(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA)

     WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH           THE
NOTIFICATION BEARING No.UDD 117 MLR 2013 BANGALORE
DATED 23.08.2013 RESERVING THE POST OF THE OFFICE OF
THE   ADHYAKSHA,    VIRAJPET  TOWN   PANCHAYAT    TO
BACKWARD 'B' (WOMAN) CATEGORY ISSUED BY THE R-1 AS
PER ANNEXURE -A AND ETC.,

IN WP.No.43581/2013

BETWEEN:
SRI SYFULLA KHAN
S/O AHAMED KHANA
                             18



AGED 45 YEARS
R/O NO.12, HALEPETE
NARASINHARAJAPURA
CHIKMAGALUR - 577 134                     ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI K RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     STATE OF KARNATAKA
       REPRESENTED BY ITS
       SECRETARY
       DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT
       VIKASA SOUDHA
       BANGALORE - 560 001

2.     DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
       CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT
       CHIKKAMAGALUR

3.     TOWN PANCHAYATH
       N.R.PURA
       REPRESENTED BY ITS
       CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
       N.R.PURA TALUK
       CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT
       CHIKKAMAGALUR                    ... RESPONDENTS

(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA FOR R1 & R2

NOTICE TO R3 DISPENSED WITH V/O DT.5.11.2013)

     WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
NOTIFICATION NO.UDD 117 MLR 2013(3) DT.23.8.2013 ISSUED
BY THE R1 PRODUCED HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE-A AS
ILLEGAL & UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ETC.,

IN WP Nos.45374 & 45855-857/2013

BETWEEN:

1.     SYED JAFFER S/O SYED PEER SAAB
       AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
       COUNCILOR WARD NO.5
                               19



       TOWN PANCHAYATH ALUR TALUK
       HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 130

2.     H.T.ASHA W/O K.V.MALLIKARJUNA
       AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
       COUNCILOR WARD NO.8
       TOWN PANCHAYATH ALUR TALUK
       HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 130

3.     H.S.NAGARATHNA
       W/O ARUNA NAYAKA
       AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
       COUNCILLOR WARD NO.2
       TOWN PANCHAYATH ALUR TALUK
       HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 130

4.     JAYAMMA W/O SHIVASWAMY
       AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
       COUNCILOR WARD NO.11
       TOWN PANCHAYATH ALUR TALUK
       HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 130         ... PETITIONERS

       (BY SRI V. SRINIVAS, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
       URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
       M.S.BUILDING
       BANGALORE - 560 003

2.     DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
       HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201
       HASSAN

3.     TOWN PANCHAYATH ALURU
       ALURU TALUK
       HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201        ... RESPONDENTS

(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA FOR R1 & R2
    NOTICE TO R3 DISPENSED WITH)
                             20



      WPs ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
NOTIFICATION AT ANNEXURE-F DATED 23.8.2013 BEARING
NO.UDD 117 MLR 2013(3), BANGALORE ISSUED BY R-1 AND
DIRECT THE R1 TO ALLOT ST FOR PRESIDENT AND BCA FOR
VICE PRESIDENT AND ETC.,

IN W.P.Nos.38395-401/2013

BETWEEN:

1.   SMT. PARVATHAMMA
     WIFE OF SIDDARAMU
     AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
     RESIDING AT NO.1764
     HARIJANA STREET
     SRIRANGAPATNA
     MANDYA - 571 438

2.   SRI G.M.SOMASHEKARA
     S/O MARIYAPPA
     AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
     RESIDING AT 559, GUMBAZ, 2ND MAIN ROAD
     GANJAM, SRIRANGAPATNA
     MANDYA - 571 438

3.   SMT. GOWRAMMA
     W/O THIMMAIAH
     AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
     HALASINK PANDIT ROAD
     4TH WARD, SRIRANGAPATNA
     MANDYA - 571 438

4.   SRI S.T.RAJU
     S/O LAE THIMMAIAH
     AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
     RESIDING AT RANGANATHA NAGARA
     SRIRANGAPATNA
     MANDYA - 571 438

5.   SRI VENKATASWAMY
     S/O LATE VENKATAPPA
                              21



       AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
       RESIDING AT 3775
       S.R.PATNA TOWN (GANJAM)
       SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK, MANDYA

6.     SRI S PRAKASHA
       SON OF D SUBRAMANYA
       AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
       RESIDING AT NO.1348
       SRIRANGAPATNA
       MANDYA - 571 438

7.     SRI E KUMARA S/O ERAIAH
       AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
       RESIDING AT NO.1057
       NIMISHAMBA DEVASTHANA
       ANJANEYA RAMAMANDIRA STREET
       SRIRANGAPATNA
       MANDYA - 571 438            ... PETITIONERS

(BY SRI M. DHYAN CHINNAPPA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       BY ITS SECRETARY
       URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
       VIDHANA SOUDHA
       BANGALORE - 560 001

2.     M SUMA W/O SHEKAR
       NO.233 A, RANGANATHA NAGAR
       SRIRANGAPATNA

3.     T KRISHNA S/O L THIMMAIAH
       BEHIND CHIKKAGARDI
       GANGA LAYOUT, GANJAM
       SRIRANGAPATNA

4.     D. SIDDARAJU S/O DEVARAJU
       AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
       KUMBARGERE BEEDI
       SRIRANGAPATNA
                             22



5.   RAJESHWARI W/O R.BHASKAR
     AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
     ANCHEKERI BEEDI
     SRIRANGAPATNA                    ... RESPONDENTS

     (AMENDED V/O DTD. 5.11.2013)

(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA FOR R1
    SRI V SRINIVAS, ADVOCATE FOR R2-R5)

     WPs ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
NOTIFICATION BEARING No.UDD 117 MLR 2013 (2),
BANGALORE, DATED 23.8.2013 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT
VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND TO QUASH THE GUIDELINES G.O.
No.UDD 73 MLR 2013, BANGALORE, DATED 4.5.2013 VIDE
ANNEXURE-B IN SO FAR AS IT IS CONTRARY TO THE
PROVISIONS OF SECTION 42 OF THE KARNATAKA
MUNICIPALITIES ACT 1964 READ WITH RULE 13 AND 13A OF
THE KARNATAKA MUNICIPAL (PRESIDENT AND VICE
PRESIDENT) ELECTION RULES, 1965 (AS AMENDED) AND ETC.,

IN WP No.38822/2013

BETWEEN:

1.   H.K.HALESH
     S/O HANUMANTHAPPA
     AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
     R/O 8TH WARD, ARASIKERE ROAD
     HARAPANAHALLI
     DAVANAGERE DISTRICT

2.   D.JHAVOOR
     S/O D.GHANISAB
     AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
     R/AT 24TH WARD, GUNDINAKERE
     HARAPANAHALLI TALUK
     DAVANAGERE DISTRICT                ... PETITIONERS

(BY SRI JAYAKUMAR S. PATIL, SR. ADVOCATE A/W
    SRI DEVI PRASAD SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
                              23



AND:
1.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
     BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
     URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
     M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 003

2.    DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
      DAVANAGERE DISTRICT
      DAVANAGERE - 583 131

3.    TASILDHAR
      HARAPANAHALLI TALUK
      HARAPANAHALLI - 577 282

4.    HARAPANAHALLI TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
      HARAPANAHALLI
      BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER - 577 282

5.    DEVANAHALLI TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
      DEVANAHALLI
      BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER - 562 321

6.    GUNDLUPET TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
      GUNDLUPET
      BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER - 583 132

7.    HUVINAHADAGALI TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
      HUVINAHADAGALI
      BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER - 577 323

8.    KANAKAPURA TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
      KANAKAPURA
      BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER - 563 822

9.    SAKLESHPUR TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
      SAKLESHPUR
      BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER - 572 33

10.   SHIRAGUPPA TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
      SHIRAGUPPA
      BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER - 587 712 ... RESPONDENTS

(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-3;
    R-4, R-5, R-6, R-7, R-8 & R-10 SERVED;
    SRI D.L.JAGADEESH, ADVOCATE FOR R9)
                                 24



     WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-C
DATED 23.8.2013 IN NO.UDD 117 MLR 2013(2), BANGALORE
ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT
NO.1 TO ALLOT GENERAL OR ST FOR THE POST OF
PRESIDENT AS RESERVATION AS PER THE ROTATION SYSTEM
AS CONTEMPLATED UNDER ARTICLE 243T(4) OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND AS PER THE GUIDELINES
ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 AS PER ANNEXURE-C.

IN WP No.38996/2013

BETWEEN:

SMT. SHOBHA
W/O S.R.MOHAN
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
COUNSELOR
WARD NO.8 (SC-W)
SAKALESHPURA
TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
HASSAN DISTRICT - 572 105                ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI NAGARAJAPPA. A, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
       DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT
       KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT
       VIKASA SOUDHA
       DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
       BANGALORE - 560 001

2.     THE TAHSILDAR
       SAKALESHPURA TALUK
       SAKALESHPURA - 577 202        ... RESPONDENTS

(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR ADVOCATE GENERAL
   A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA)

     WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
GUIDELINES DATED 4.5.2013 IN NO.UDD.73.MLR.2013
                                 25



ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-D AS THE
SAME IS ULTRA-VIRUS, UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND CONTRARY
TO THE ACT UNDER SECTION 42 (2-A) AND ALSO CONTRARY
TO THE ARTICLE 243-T OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND
ETC.


IN WP No.39002/2013

BETWEEN:

G. PRAKASH
S/O H.GANGADHAR
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
TOWN PANCHAYATH MEMBER
R/O AMBEDKAR COLONY
MOLAKALMURU
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT                        ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI T.B.SANDESH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
       URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
       M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 003

2.     DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
       CHITRADURGA DISTRICT
       CHITHRADURGA - 571 820

3.     TASILDHAR
       MOLAKALMURU TALUK
       CHITRADURGA - 571 820

4.     MOLAKALMURU TOWN PANCHAYATH
       MOLAKALMUR
       BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER - 58332 ... RESPONDENTS

(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-3;
    NOTICE TO R-4 DISPENSED WITH)

     WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-C
                             26



IN NO.UDD 117 MLR 2013 (2), BANGALORE, DATED 23.8.2013
ISSUED BY THE R1 AND DIRECT THE R1 TO ALLOT GENERAL
FOR THE POST OF PRESIDENT AS RESERVATION AS PER THE
ROTATION SYSTEM AS CONTEMPLATED UNDER ARTICLE
243T(4) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA & AS PER THE
GUIDELINES ISSUED BY THE R1 AS PER ANNEXRUE-C.

IN WP No.39219/2013

BETWEEN:

SMT. H.V.SARASWATHI
W/O NANDAGOPAL
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
NELAMANGALA PURASABHA MEMBER
WARD NO.4, NO.163
JAYANAGARA, NELAMANGALA TOWN
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562123        ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI ADINARAYANAPPA FOR M/S. A.N.N. ASSOCIATES,
    ADVOCATES)

AND:
1.   THE SECRETARY
     DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT
     VIDHANASOUDHA
     BANGALORE - 560 001

2.   THE SECRETARY
     RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND
     PATTANA PANCHAYATH DEPT.,
     VIDHANASOUDHA
     BANGALORE - 560 001

3.   THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
     BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT
     BANGALORE - 560 001

4.   THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
     DODDABALLAPUR SUB DIVISION
     BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT
     BANGALORE - 560 001              ... RESPONDENTS

(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-4)
                              27



     WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
NOTIFICATION DATED 23.8.2013 VIDE NOTIFICATION No.UDD
117 MLR 2013 (2) AT PART IV-A OF THE KARNATAKA GAZETTE
NOTIFICATION VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,


IN WP Nos.39284-285/2013

BETWEEN:

SMT. T. MANJULA
WIFE OF B.KRISHNAPPA
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
COUNCILOR
HIRIYUR TOWN MUNICIPALITY
WARD NO.2, HIRIYUR TOWN
CHILTRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 598          ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI RAMESH CHANDRA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
       DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT
       VIDHANA SOUDHA
       BANGALORE - 560 001

2.     DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT
       VIDHANA SOUDHA
       BANGALORE - 560 001
       REPRESENTED BY ITS
       UNDER SECRETARY

3.     DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
       OFFICE OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
       CHITRADURGA DISTRICT
       CHITRADURGA - 577 501

4.     CHIEF OFFICER
       HIRIYUR TOWN MUNICIPALITY
       HIRIYUR TOWN
       CHITRADURGA - 577 598
                                28



5.     MR. ZABIULLA
       S/O MR. SHEIKH AHMED
       AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
       R/AT SRINIVASA LAYOUT
       3RD CROSS, MYSORE ROAD
       HIRIYUR TALUK
       CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 598   ... RESPONDENTS
       (AMENDED V/O DTD. 05.11.2013)

(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR, ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-3;
    R-4 SERVED;
    SRI ADITHYA SONDHI, ADVOCATE FOR R-5;
    SRI S.S. HALALLI, ADVOCATE FOR
    PROPOSED RESPONDENT IN I.A. NO.5/2013)

      WPs ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-A IN
No. UDD 117 MLR 2013 (2), BANGALORE, DATED 23.8.2013 IN
RESPECT OF ITEM NO.33 & DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO
COMPLETE ROTATION & ROSTER AND ETC.

IN WP No.39353/2013

BETWEEN:
SMT. SHANTHAMMA
W/O LATE LAKSHMAN
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
MEMBER OF TOWN PANCHAYATH
RESIDING AT DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR NAGAR
2ND CROSS ROAD
BELUR TOWN & TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 115                 ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI NAIK N.R., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
       REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
       PANCHAYATH RAJ
       VIDHANA SOUDHA
       BANGALORE - 560 001
                            29



2.   THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
     TOWN PANCHAYATH
     BELUR TOWN & TALUK - 573 115
     HASSAN DISTRICT

3.   THE RETURNING OFFICER & TAHASILDAR
     BELUR TALUK - 573 115
     BELUR, HASSAN DISTRICT

4.   SRI GIRISH
     S/O BORAYYA GOWDA
     AGE 38 YEARS
     R/O RIVERS STREET
     BELUR
     HASSAN DISTRICT

5.   B.D.CHENNAKESHAVA
     S/O LATE B.C.DEVAPPA
     AGE 42 YEARS
     R/O CHENNEGOWDA STREET
     BELUR, HASSAN DISTRICT           ... RESPONDENTS
     (AMENDED V/O DATED 20.09.2013)

(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR, ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA FOR R1-R3
    SRI N. RAVINDRANATH, ADVOCATE FOR R4)

      WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
NOTIFICATION ISSUED IN No.UDD 117 MLR 2013 (2),
BANGALORE, DTD. 23.8.2013, PUBLISHED IN KARNATAKA
GAZETTE DT.23.8.2013, BY THE R1 PRODUCED AT
ANNEXURE-E IN RESPECT OF SCHEDULED CASTE WOMEN
CATEGORY FOR THE BELUR TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL AND
ETC.,

IN WP Nos.39665-666/2013

BETWEEN:

1.   SRI M.S. KIRAN SHANKAR
     S/O LATE SANNAIAH
     AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
     PRESENT COUNCILLOR OF WARD NO.10
     MALAVALLI - 571 430
                              30



2.     SRI UMESH
       S/O LATE MARAIAH
       AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
       PRESENT COUNCILOR OF WARD NO.22
       GM STREET, MALAVALLI - 571 430  ... PETITIONERS

(BY SRI NISHANTH A.V, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     STATE OF KARNATAKA
       URBAN SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
       URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
       4TH FLOOR, VIKASA SOUDHA
       DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
       BANGALORE - 560 001
2.     DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
       MANDYA DISTRICT
       MANDYA - 571 401

3.     THE TAHSHILDAR
       MALAVALLI TALUK
       MALAVALLI - 571 430 AND
       THE PRESCRIBED OFFICER
       FOR ELECTION TO PRESIDENT AND
       VICE-PRESIDENT
       MALAVALLI TOWN
       MUNICIPAL COUNCIL               ... RESPONDENTS

(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR, ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA)

     WPs ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
NOTIFICATION BEARING NO.UDD 117 MLR 2013 (2),
BANGALORE, DATED 23.8.2013 ISSUED BY THE R-1 VIDE
ANNEXURE-C IN SO FAR AS THE MALAVALLI TOWN MUNICIPAL
COUNCIL IS CONCERNED.

IN WP Nos.40245-247/2013

BETWEEN:

1.     SMT. GEETHA .O.G
       W/O SUNILKUMAR
                                31



       AGED 38 YEARS
       TMC COUNCILOR, WARD NO.12
       R/AT CHANDRASHEKAR ROAD
       LAKSHMIPURA, ARASIKERE TOWN
       HASSAN DISTRICT - 577 201

2.     SMT. GEETJA B
       W/O H.R. VISHWANATH
       AGED 36 YEARS
       TMC COUNCILOR, WARD NO.26
       R/AT OPPOSITE TO PRATHIBHA COLLEGE
       NH-206, ARASIKERE TOWN
       HASSAN DISTRICT - 577 201

3.     SRI M.A. SRINIVASA
       S/O MARIGOWDA A.R.
       AGED 41 YEARS
       TMC COUNCILOR, WARD NO.15
       R/AT GANAPATHI TEMPLE ROAD
       SRINIVASANAGAR, ARASIKERE TOWN
       HASSAN DISTRICT - 577 201      ... PETITIONERS

(BY SRI N.R. NAIK, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     STATE OF KARNATAKA
       BY ITS SECRETARY
       PANCHAYATH RAJ & URBAN DEVELOPMENT
       M.S.BUILDINGS
       BANGALORE - 560 001

2.     THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
       HASSAN DISTRICT
       HASSAN - 577 201

3.     THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
       ARASIKERE TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
       ARASIKERE TOWN & TALUK
       HASSAN DISTRICT - 577 201

4.     THE RETURNING OFFICER
       & TAHSILDAR
                             32



     ARASIKERE TOWN & TALUK
     HASSAN DISTRICT - 577 201     ... RESPONDENTS

(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR, ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA FOR R1 & R2;
    SRI K.N. RAKSHIT, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
    R4 & R5 SERVED)

     WPs ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH AND SET ASIDE
THE NOTIFICATION No.UDD.117.MLR.2013(2), BANGALORE,
DATED 23.8.2013 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-
C IN RESPECT OF 3RD RESPONDENT-T.M.C. ARASIKERE AND
ETC.

IN WP No.41309/2013

BETWEEN:

KRISHNA S/O VENKATAPPA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
CASTE - BHOVI
SCHEDULED CASTE
RESIDING AT 5TH WARD
2ND CROSS, INDIRANAGAR
TARIKERI
CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT                   ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI DESAI SHARANABASPPA VIRANNA, ADVOCATE)

AND:
1.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
     THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
     M.S.BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDI
     BANGALORE - 560 001
     REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

2.   THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
     OF CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT
     CHIKKAMAGALUR - 577 101

3.   THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
     OF THARIKERE TALUK
     TARIKERE - 577 228
     CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT
                             33




4.     THE TAHASILDAR
       OF THARIKERE TALUK
       THARIKERI - 577 228
       CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT

5.     THARIKERE TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
       THARIKERE
       CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT - 577 228
                                        ... RESPONDENTS

(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR, ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-4
      R5 SERVED)

     WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH NOTIFICATION
NO.UDD 117 MLR 2013 (2), DATED 23.8.2013 ISSUED BY THE
URBAN DEVELOPMENT SECRETARIAT (ANNEXURE-E) IN
RESPECT OF TARIKERE TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL ONLY
AND ETC.

IN WP No.41809/2013

BETWEEN:

K.THARADEVI
W/O K. KUMARASWAMY
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
MEMBER KUNIGAL TOWN
MUNCIPAL COUNCIL
R/AT SIDHARTHA COLONY, WRAD NO.6
KUNIGAL TOWN
TUMKUR DISTRICT                         ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI SUBHASH KOWDICHAR, ADVOCATE)


AND:

1.     STATE OF KARNATAKA
       BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
       URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
       M.S.BUILDING
       BANGALORE - 560 003
                              34



2.   DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
     TUMKUR DISTRICT
     TUMKUR

3.   TAHSILDAR
     KUNIGAL TALUK
     TUMKUR

4.   KUNIGAL TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
     BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER
     TUMKUR DISTRICT
     TUMKUR                       ... RESPONDENTS

(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR, ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA FOR R1-R3;
    SRI M.A. SUBRAMANI, ADVOCATE FOR R4)

     WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226           OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED
NOTIFICATION NO.UDD 117 MLR 2013 (2), BANGALORE,
DATED    23.8.2013  VIDE   ANNEXURE-A    ISSUED  BY
RESPONDENT NO.1 AND ETC.

IN WP No.47293/2013

BETWEEN:

ABDUL BASHEER
S/O P.M.HASANABBA
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
R/O NO.7-196-M 14
PRANATHYA VILLAGE
MOODABIDRI
MANGALORE
D.K. - 574 227                           ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI DEVI PRASAD SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:
1.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
     BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
     URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
     M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 003

2.   DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
     UDUPI DISTRICT, UDUPI - 576 101
                              35



3.    TAHASILDAR, MUDABIDRI TALUK
      MUDABIDRI

4.    MOODABIDRI TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
      MOODABIDRI
      BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER - 574 227

5.    DEVANAHALLI TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
      DEVANAHALLI
      BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER - 562 270

6.    GUNDLUPET TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
      GUNDLUPET
      BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER - 583 118

7.    HUVINAHADAGALI TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
      HUVINAHADAGALI
      BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER - 586 801

8.    KANAKAPURA TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
      KANAKAPURA, BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER - 562 117

9.    SAKALESHPUR TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
      SAKALESHPUR
      BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER - 591 313

10.   SHIRAGUPPA TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
      SHIRAGUPPA
      BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER         ... RESPONDENTS


(BY PROF. RAVIVARMA KUMAR, ADVOCATE GENERAL
    A/W SRI D. NAGARAJ, AGA FOR R1 TO R3;
    NOTICE TO R4 TO R10 DISPENSED WITH)

     WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE -C
DATED 23.8.2013 ISSUED IN NO.UDD 117 MLR 2013 (2),
BANGALORE BY R-1 AND ETC.

     THESE WRIT PETITIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED ON 04.12.2013 FOR ORDERS AND COMING ON FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                    36



                        ORDER

In these writ petitions, the challenge is to the following four notifications issued by the State Government allotting offices of Chairpersons and Vice Chairpersons to the various reserved categories in the Municipal Corporations, City Municipal Councils, Town Municipal Councils & Town Panchayats referred to therein.

1) Notification No.UDD 118 MLR 2013, Bangalore, dated 21.08.2013 issued in respect of Municipal Corporations,

2) Notification No.UDD 117 MLR 2013(1), Bangalore, dated 23.08.2013 issued in respect of City Municipal Councils,

3) Notification No.UDD 117 MLR 2013(2), Bangalore, dated 23.08.2013 issued in respect of Town Municipal Councils,

4) Notification No.UDD 117 MLR 2013(3), Bangalore, dated 23.08.2013 issued in respect of Town Panchayats.

2. In some of the writ petitions (W.P.Nos.38395 to 38401 of 2013), the petitioners have prayed for a declaration that Rules 13 & 13A of the Karnataka Municipalities (President and Vice President) Election Rules, 1965 and the Guidelines issued by the State Government regarding reservation of offices of the 37 Presidents and Vice Presidents of City Municipal Councils, Town Municipal Councils and Town Panchayats by rotation as per Government order No.UDD 73 MLR 2013, Bangalore, dated 04.05.2013 are ultra vires the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964. They have also prayed for a direction to the State Government to frame Rules to give effect to the principle of rotation envisaged in Section 42 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964.

3. As the question of law raised is the same in all these writ petitions, they were heard together and are disposed of by this common order.

4. The petitioners have challenged the aforesaid notifications on the sole ground that the allotments made under the notifications violate the principle of rotation provided under the provisions of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 ('the Municipal Corporations Act' for short) and the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 ('the Municipalities Act' for short), for reservation of offices of 38 Chairpersons and Vice Chairpersons in the Municipalities of the State.

4.1 Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the allotment of offices made in the impugned notifications is arbitrary and is violative of the principle of rotation provided under the two Municipal Acts referred to above. The Allotments are not rotated but are repeated. The principle of rotation is followed only in its breach and it is hardly followed in any of the previous terms also. They further submitted that the Rules also do not provide for rotation as mandated by the Legislature.

4.2 Learned Advocate General raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of these writ petitions on the ground that there is a bar under Article 243ZG of the Constitution of India to entertain these petitions and therefore, the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed. He referred to several judgments of the Supreme Court rendered in the context of Article 329(b) of the 39 Constitution of India. He submitted that the petitioners have a statutory remedy under the respective Municipal Acts and the Rules made thereunder and hence, the petitioners can challenge the impugned notifications by filing an election petition before the Jurisdictional District Judge. He also submitted that repetition is not opposed to rotation and therefore, the impugned notifications do not warrant any interference by this Court.

5. This Court in a similar matter in H.Shivappa v. State of Karnataka [2005(4) Kar.L.J.328] had an occasion to consider the very contentions now urged by the learned Advocate General regarding maintainability of the writ petitions. On a very detailed consideration of the matter, this Court rejected the said contentions and held that the writ petitions were maintainable. I am in respectful agreement with the said view. Suffice to refer to the following observations made therein:

35. It is in the light of such rival contentions, the preliminary objections that has been raised on behalf of the State with regard to the maintainability of the present writ petitions for examination in the exercise of writ jurisdiction is required to be considered.
40
36. If the Constitution provides an embargo for entertaining a writ petition by this Court in a situation mentioned therein, no further question arises, the matter ends there. There is no question of this Court looking into the matter any further irrespective of the irregularity or even illegality alleged in the petitions. The constitutional embargo acts as a threshold bar for entertaining a writ petition, provided it is there. The bar pleaded is in terms of Article 243-ZG(b) of the Constitution of India, which reads as under:
"243-ZG. Bar to interference by Courts in electoral matters.- Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution.-
   (a)    xxx

   (b)     no election to any municipality shall be called
in question except by an election petition prescribed to such authority and in such manner as is provided for by or under any law made by the Legislature of a State"

The bar is in respect of the examination of the question of elections to the Municipalities. It is to be noticed that the election to Municipalities is not the same as elections to the Chairpersons of the Municipalities, as indicated in Article 243-P(e) of the Constitution.

37. Even in Article 243-P(e) in fact a clear distinction has been maintained between a municipality and the Chairpersons of the municipality. Separate provisions providing for reservations have been made in Article 243-T for elections to the Municipalities and for elections to the posts of Chairpersons in the Municipalities. The word 'municipality' does not automatically take in its fold the Chairpersons of the municipality. The bar contained in Article 243-ZG is in respect of the elections to any municipality and not elections to the Chairpersons of the Municipalities. The bar operates if it is actually so provided for and not byway of an analogy or by way of an extension, if one should understand the position on the settled principles of interpretation.

41

38. It is not possible to include the elections to the posts of Chairpersons to a municipality within the meaning of the word 'municipality', as the provision is one which curtails the jurisdiction of the Courts, imposes fetters on the jurisdiction, until and unless the bar is express and unambiguous.

39. On a plain reading of Article 243-ZG(b) itself, it is obvious that elections to the posts of Chairpersons of a municipality do not find place in this Article. It is not a bar in respect of examination of the question arising in the context of elections to Chairpersons in Municipalities, by the Court.

40. In the absence of an express bar, the next stage is as to whether the Court can exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. It is no doubt true that under Article 226, where an alternative adequate remedy is provided for, the writ Court is rather slow in exercising jurisdiction, and in fact as a rule of practice such matters are relegated to be agitated before the very forum and in the manner provided for by the statute. Here again, on an examination of the provisions of Section 42(2-A) and 42(3) of the act read with the provisions of the Rules, it clearly indicates that the rule does not provide for agitating the questions such as the validity of notifications such as the one dated 1-9-2004, challenged in this batch of writ petitions and therefore the provisions cannot even be construed as one providing for an alternative remedy.

****************************************************

45. Even here, on the application of these five principles enumerated in para 32 of Ashok Kumar's case, I do not find the situation wherein this Court cannot entertain present writ petitions, inasmuch as the stage at which the petitioners have approached this Court was one prior to commencement of the electoral process. May be in some later petitions, the calendar of events had been issued, but the notification impugned herein itself is one which precedes the electoral process and in fact is not one which was a part of the process of election in the sense that whatever 42 happened happens under the notification before the commencement of the electoral process and the impact is not one that begins or which surfaces for the first time during the electoral process.

46. Provision for reservation having already been made under the notification, it acts as a threshold bar on such persons who do not come within the scope of the reservation and therefore such persons are prevented from contesting the election itself and a person who has not contested an election, cannot by himself maintain an election petition, even in terms of Rule 15(1) of the Rules, as an election petition can be filed by a person who was himself a candidate in the election or by three or more Councilors joined together as petitioners and cannot be by a single person if the person himself was not a candidate in the elections. In most of the cases, the grievances of the petitioners in the present batch of writ petitions being that they are being deprived of an opportunity of even contesting the elections to the posts of Chairpersons of the Municipalities, the petitioners by themselves cannot maintain an election petition, in which event a provision like Rules 15, 16, 17 and 18 of the Rules can never be said to be an adequate or efficacious remedy to act as a bar to the exercise of writ jurisdiction. Even an examination of the relief that can be granted in terms of Rule 15(1) also clearly indicates that the Electoral Tribunal cannot grant any relief in favour of a person who is himself deprived of an opportunity to contest the elections due to the pattern of reservation being such, and at the best if a petition was tenable, the election of the returned candidate can be questioned and nothing beyond.

47. The only other bar that had been pleaded by the learned Advocate General is in terms of the judgment of the Division bench in W.A.No. 3914 of 2004 and connected cases. Here again while the question is not free from doubt in the light of the observation contained in para 9 of the judgment, what is pointed out on behalf of the petitioners is that in terms of the judgment of the Division Bench in 43 W.A.4783 and 4784 of 2004 and connected cases, wherein it is expressly observed in para 4 of the judgment is thus:

.....However, it is the contention of Sri. R.L.Patil, learned Counsel for the contesting respondents that in the remedy provided under Section 23 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, the validity of the impugned notification cannot be gone into. We need not express any opinion on this contention placed before us at this stage. Suffice it to state that if the validity of the notification could not be gone into in an election petition to be filed under Section 23 of the Act, that question can be gone into by this Court in the pending writ proceedings...
Is that if the validity of the impugned notification cannot be subject-matter of a petition in terms of Section 23 of the Act, that can be gone into by this Court even in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
*************************************************
56. I find considerable force in the arguments advanced as above by the learned Counsel for the petitioners. In fact it is the shying away of the State from defending the correctness or legality of the impugned notification on the merits of the matter that has compelled this Court to examine the issues, more particularly when allegations are levelled against the State that the power to issue a notification of this nature is being misused and is being manipulated to favour persons belonging to its own political affiliations and to harm the interests of others belonging to other political parties. While the allegation is such, the validity of the notification is questioned on the premise that the same being in contravention of the statutory provisions and in the teeth of the constitutional provisions of Article 243-T of the Constitution of India itself. Accordingly, the contentions that these writ petitions should be dismissed in limine, as urged by the learned Advocate General on behalf of the State and other contesting parties, cannot be accepted.

(Underlining supplied)

6. In this context, it is also relevant to refer to the following observations made by a Division Bench of this 44 Court in L.Shivanna Vs. State of Karnataka (ILR 1988 KAR 2121):

"23.......................................To put it in a nut shell, our conclusion is - the doors of the High Court under Article 226 is closed if the doors of the Election Tribunal is open, and not closed if the doors of the Election Tribunal is not open..................."

7. In the light of the two judgments referred to above and as the Election Tribunal created under the two Municipal Acts cannot go into the validity of the notifications impugned herein, the contention of the learned Advocate General regarding maintainability of these writ petitions is rejected. The writ petitions are held maintainable.

8. The question that needs to be answered in these writ petitions is as to whether the allotment of offices made in the impugned notifications is violative of the principle of rotation mandated under the Municipal Corporations Act and the Municipalities Act?

9. To examine the question raised, it is necessary to notice the following provisions of the Municipal 45 Corporations Act, the Municipalities Act and the relevant Rules framed under the said Acts:

9.1. The Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976:
Section 2(29). "Prescribed" means prescribed by rules made under this Act;
Section 10. Mayor and Deputy Mayor.-(1) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (1-A), the Corporation shall, at its first meeting after a general election of Councillors and at its first meeting in the same month in each year thereafter, elect,-
(a) one of its Councillors referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 7 to be the Mayor, and
(b) one other Councilor referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 7 to be the Deputy Mayor.

(1-A) There shall be reserved by the Government in the prescribed manner.-

(a) such number of offices of Mayor and Deputy Mayor in the State, for the persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and the number of such offices shall bear as nearly as may be, the same proportion to the total number of offices in the State as the population of Scheduled Castes in the State or of the Scheduled Tribes in the State bears to the total population of the State;

(b) such number of offices of Mayor and Deputy Mayor in the State which shall as nearly as may be, one- third of the total number of offices of the Mayor and Deputy Mayor in the State for the persons belonging to the Backward Classes:

Provided that out of the offices reserved under this clause eighty per cent of the total number of such offices shall be reserved for the persons falling under category "A" and the remaining twenty per cent of the 46 offices shall be reserved for the persons falling under category "B":
Provided further that if no person falling under category "A" is available, the offices reserved for that category shall also be filled by the persons falling under category "B" and vice-versa.
Provided also that the number of offices of Mayor and Deputy Mayor reserved for the Backward Classes under this clause shall be so determined that the total number of offices of Mayor and Deputy Mayor reserved for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes under clause (a) and the Backward Classes under this clause shall not exceed fifty per cent of the total number of offices of Mayor and Deputy Mayor of the City Corporations in the State.
(c) not more than fifty per cent of the total number of offices of Mayor and Deputy Mayor in the State from each of the categories reserved for persons belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes and those which are non-reserved for women:
Provided that the offices reserved under this sub- section shall be allotted by rotation in the prescribed manner.
Explanation.- For the removal of doubts it is hereby declared that the principle of rotation for purposes of reservation of offices under this sub-section shall commence from the first ordinary election to be held after the first day of June 1994.
(2) The Mayor or the Deputy Mayor shall hold office for one year from the date of his election and shall, notwithstanding the expiry of the said period, continue in office till his successor is elected, provided that in the meantime he does not cease to be a Councillor.

*************************************** 47 9.2. The Karnataka Municipal Corporations (Election) Rules, 1979 :

Rule 73-A. Reservation of offices of Mayor and Deputy Mayor.- (1) Reservation of offices of Mayor and Deputy Mayor in the State for different categories in accordance with sub-section (1-A) of Section 10 shall be as specified in the table below.-

                            TABLE
        Sl.                    Mayors and Deputy Mayors
                  Category
        No.                       TOTAL        WOMEN
         1 Scheduled Caste           3            1
         2 Scheduled Tribe           1            1
         3 Backward Class (A         4            2
            and B)
         4 Unreserved                8            4
            Total                   16            8

(2) The offices of Mayor and Deputy Mayor reserved for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe in the State shall be allotted by the Government to the Corporation having the highest percentage of population belonging to the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe with reference to the total population of the city:
Provided that both the offices of Mayor and Deputy Mayor in any Corporation shall not be allotted in favour of the category of Scheduled Castes only.
(3) The Offices of Mayor and Deputy Mayor of the Corporation reserved for Backward Classes and those of unreserved category shall be allotted by the Government to Corporations taking into consideration such factors as the Government, may deem fit.
(4) The offices of Mayor and Deputy Mayor reserved for Women in each category referred to in sub-rule (1) shall be allotted by the Government to the Corporation taking into consideration such factors as the Government may deem fit:
Provided that both the offices of Mayor and Deputy Mayor of the Corporation may not be reserved for Women.
48
(5) The offices of the Mayor and Deputy Mayor in the City Corporations of the State to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes/Women, and Backward Classes for the subsequent terms be determined by the Government from time to time by taking into consideration such factors as deem fit:
Provided that if the reservation worked out to any category is less than 0.5%, then no offices of Mayor and Deputy Mayor be reserved to such category.
9.3. The Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964:
Section 2(21): "prescribed" means prescribed by rules made by the Government under this Act;
Section 42. President and Vice-President. --(1) For every municipal council, there shall be a President and a Vice-President.
(2) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (2-A) the Councillors shall at the first meeting of the Municipal Council after the general election and at a subsequent meeting held immediately before the expiry of term of office of the President and Vice-president choose two members from amongst the elected councillors to be respectively President and Vice-President and so often as there is a casual vacancy in the office of the President, or Vice-President shall choose another member from amongst the elected councillors to be the President or Vice-president, as the case may be.

(2-A) There shall be reserved by the Government in the prescribed manner.--

(a) such number of offices of President and Vice- President in the State for the persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and the number of such offices bearing as nearly as may be the same proportion to the total number of offices in the State as the population of the Scheduled Castes in the State or of the Scheduled Tribes in the State bears to the total population of the State;

49

(b) such number of offices of President and Vice- president in the State which shall as nearly as may be one-third of the total number of offices of President and Vice-President in the State for the persons belonging to the Backward Classes;

Provided that out of the offices reserved under this clause, eighty per cent of the total number of such offices shall be reserved for the persons falling under category "A" and the remaining twenty per cent of the offices shall be reserved for the persons falling under category "B":

Provided further that if no person falling under category "A" is available, offices reserved for that category shall also be filled by the persons falling under category "B" and vice versa:
Provided also that the number of offices of President and Vice-President reserved for the backward classes under this clause shall be so determined that the total number of offices of President and Vice-President reserved for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes and the Backward Classes under this clause shall not exceed fifty per cent of the total number of offices of President and Vice-President of the Municipal Councils in the State.
(c) not more than fifty per cent of the total number of offices of the President and Vice-President in the State from each of the categories, reserved for persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes and those which are non-

reserved, for women:

Provided that the offices reserved under this sub- section shall be allotted by rotation in the prescribed manner to different municipal councils. Explanation.-- For the removal of doubts it is hereby declared that the principle of rotation for the purpose of reservation of offices under this sub-section shall commence from the first ordinary election to be held after the first day of June, 1994;
50
(3) The election of the President or the Vice-President and the filling up of vacancies in the said offices and the determination of disputes relating to such election shall be in accordance with such rules as may be prescribed:
Provided that the authority to determine such election disputes shall be such judicial officer as may be prescribed.
*********************** 9.4. The Karnataka Municipalities (President & Vice President) Election Rules, 1965:
Rule 13. Reservation of Offices of President and Vice-President.- (1) Reservation of offices of President and Vice-President of the City Municipal Council, town Municipal Councils and Town Panchyats for different categories in accordance with sub-section (2-A) of Section 42 read with Section 353 shall be specified as in the tables below.-
Table 1 Reservation of offices in City Municipal Councils Sl.No. Category President Vice-President 1 SC 4 4 2 SC-Women 3 3 3 ST 2 2 4 ST-Women 1 1 5 Backward Class-A 5 5 Backward Class-A 6 5 5 (Women) 7 Backward Class-B 1 1 Backward Class-B 8 1 1 (Women) 9 General 11 11 10 General - Women 11 11 TOTAL 44 44 51 Table 2 Reservation of offices in Town Municipal Councils Sl.No. Category President Vice-

President 1 SC 8 8 2 SC-Women 7 7 3 ST 3 3 4 ST-Women 3 3 5 Backward Class-A 11 11 6 Backward Class-A 10 10 (Women) 7 Backward Class-B 3 3 8 Backward Class-B 2 2 (Women) 9 General 24 24 10 General - Women 23 23 TOTAL 94 94 Table 3 Reservation of offices in Town Panchayats Sl.No. Category President Vice-

President 1 SC 6 6 2 SC-Women 5 5 3 ST 2 2 4 ST-Women 2 2 5 Backward Class-A 8 8 6 Backward Class-A 7 7 (Women) 7 Backward Class-B 2 2 8 Backward Class-B 2 2 (Women) 9 General 17 17 10 General - Women 17 17 TOTAL 68 68 (2) The offices of President reserved for Schedules Tribes shall be allotted by the Government to the Municipal Councils, or as the case may be, Town Panchayats having the highest percentage of population belonging to the Schedules Tribes with reference to the total population of the municipal area. The same procedure shall be followed by the government for allotting to the 52 Municipal Councils, or as the case may be, Town Panchayats the same number of offices of Vice-President for members belonging to the Scheduled Tribes but excluding the Municipal Councils, or as the case may be, Town Panchayats in which the office of President have been already allotted to them.

(3) The offices of President and Vice-President of Municipal Councils or as the case may be, Town Panchayats in the State shall be allotted by the Government for members belonging to the Scheduled Castes in the same manner as specified in sub-rule (1):

Provided that both the offices of President and Vice President in any Municipal Council, or as the case may be, Town Panchayats shall not be allotted in favour of the category of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes only:
Provided further that if the reservation worked out to any category is less than 0.5% no offices of President and Vice-President be reserved to such category. (4) The offices of President and Vice-President of the Municipal Councils, or as the case may be, Town Panchayats, reserved for Backward Classes and those of unreserved category, shall be allotted by the Government taking into consideration such factors as the Government may deem fit.
(5) The offices of President and Vice-President reserved for women for each category referred in sub-rule (1) shall be allotted by the Government to the Municipal Councils, or as the case may be, Town Panchayats taking into consideration such factors as the Government may deem fit:
Provided that both the offices of President and Vice- president of the Municipal Council, or as the case may be, Town Panchayats shall not be reserved for women. (6).......... (Omitted) Rule 13-A. Rotation of offices.- (1) Subject to sub-rule (1) of Rule 13, the offices of President and Vice-President 53 of the City Municipal Councils, Town Municipal Councils and Town Panchayats in the State shall be rotated to the different categories from term to term.

Explanation.- For the purpose of reservation of offices by rotation the cycle of rotation shall commence from first term after first ordinary election held after First day of June, 1994 and completed when all the categories are represented in all City Municipal Councils, Town Municipal Councils and Town Panchayats as the case may be. Thereafter a fresh cycle of rotation shall commence.

(2) The office of the President and Vice-President of City Municipal Councils, Town Municipal Councils and Town Panchayats reserved for Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Caste-Woman, Scheduled Tribe, Scheduled Tribe- Woman, Backward Class-Category A, Backward Class Category A-Woman, Backward Class - Category B, Backward Class Category B-Woman, General-Woman in the previous terms shall as far as possible be not allotted to the same category in the succeeding term until the cycle of rotation is completed in respect of such category.

(3) Both the office of the President and Vice-President of the City Municipal Councils, Town Municipal Councils or Town Panchayats, as the case may be, shall not be allotted in favour of the same category of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Backward Class and Woman and in case of an office of President is allotted to the category of Scheduled Castes, the Office of the Vice- President shall not be allotted to the Category of Scheduled Tribes but shall be allotted to the next in rotation in the cycle of rotation and vice versa. (4) The Offices reserved for persons belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes shall be allotted by rotation to the City Municipal Council, Town Municipal Council and Town Panchayat having the next 54 higher percentage of population in which the offices have not been allotted to them in the previous terms. (5) The Government shall prepare and maintain separate registers of offices of president and vice-president of City Municipal Councils, Town Municipal Councils and Town Panchayats allotted to different categories in Form A. (6) The Government shall prepare and maintain separate registers of offices of President and Vice- President allotted by reservation for each category in different City Municipal Councils, Town Municipal Councils and Town Panchayats in Form B.

10. It is also relevant to refer to the following Articles of the Constitution of India:

243T. Reservation of seats.- (1) Seats shall be reserved for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes in every Municipality and the number of seats so reserved shall bear, as nearly as may be, the same proportion to the total number of seats to be filled by direct election in that Municipality as the population of the Scheduled Castes in the Municipality area or of the Scheduled Tribes in the Municipal area bears to the total population of that area and such seats may be allotted by rotation to different constituencies in a Municipality.
(2) Not less than one-third of the total number of seats reserved under Clause (1) shall be reserved for women belonging to the Scheduled Castes or as the case may be, the Scheduled Tribes.
(3) Not less than one-third (including the number of seats reserved for women belonging to the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes) of the total number of seats to be filled by direct election in every Municipality shall be reserved for women and such seats may be allotted by rotation to different constituencies in a Municipality. (4) The offices of Chairpersons in the Municipalities shall be reserved for the Scheduled Castes, the 55 Scheduled Tribes and women in such manner as the Legislature of a State may, by law, provide. (5) The reservation of seats under Clauses (1) and (2) and the reservation of offices of Chairpersons (other than the reservation for women) under Clause (4) shall cease to have effect on the expiration of the period specified in Article 334. (6) Nothing in this Part shall prevent the Legislature of a State from making any provision for reservation of seats in any Municipality or offices of Chairpersons in the Municipalities in favour of backward class of citizens.
243U. Duration of Municipalities, etc- (1) Every Municipality, unless sooner dissolved under any law for the time being in force, shall continue for five years from the date appointed for its first meeting and no longer:
Provided that a Municipality shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard before its dissolution. (2) No amendment of any law for the time being in force shall have the effect of causing dissolution of a Municipality at any level, which is functioning immediately before such amendment, till the expiration of its duration specified in clause (1) (3) An election to Constitute a Municipality shall be completed,-
(a) before the expiry of its duration specified in clause (1);
(b) before the expiration of a period of six months from the date of its dissolution:
Provided that where the remainder of the period for which the dissolved Municipality would have continued is less than six months, it shall not be necessary to hold any election under this clause for constituting the Municipality for such period. (4) A Municipality constituted upon the dissolution of a Municipality before the expiration of its duration shall continue only for the remainder of the period for which the dissolved Municipality would have continued under clause (1) had it not been so dissolved.
56
243ZA. Elections to the Municipalities.- (1) The superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of electoral rolls for, and the conduct of, all elections to the Municipalities shall be vested in the State Election Commission referred to in article 243K. (2) Subject to provisions of this Constitution, the Legislature of a State may, by law, make provision with respect to all matters relating to, or in connection with, elections to the Municipalities.

243ZG. Bar to interference by courts in electoral matters.-

Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution,-

(a) the validity of any law relating to the delimitation of constituencies or the allotment of seats to such constituencies, made or purporting to be made under Article 243ZA shall not be called in question in any Court;

(b) no election to any Municipality shall be called in question except by an election petition presented to such authority and in such manner as is provided for by or under any law made by the Legislature of a State.

11. The meaning of the principle of rotation in the context of the above referred proviso to sub-Section (1A) of Section 10 of the Municipal Corporations Act and the proviso to sub-section (2A) of Section 42 of the Municipalities Act needs to be stated to answer the question raised in these writ petitions. It is also submitted by the learned Counsel on both sides that there is no judgment by this Court on the interpretation of the word 'rotation' occurring in both the above provisos. 57 11.1 Both the above provisos which are similarly worded state that allotment of the offices of Chairpersons and Vice Chairpersons reserved in the Municipalities of the State shall be allotted to the reserved categories by rotation in the prescribed manner. Though both the provisos are quoted above, for convenience, the proviso under the Municipalities Act is extracted below:

"Provided that the offices reserved under this sub-section shall be allotted by rotation in the prescribed manner to different municipal councils. Explanation.-- For the removal of doubts it is hereby declared that the principle of rotation for the purpose of reservation of offices under this sub-section shall commence from the first ordinary election to be held after the first day of June, 1994;"

Rotation means something which moves in a circular order. 'Rotate' means to cause to turn in a circle. The principle of rotation, in the context of the above two provisos, means that the offices reserved for each of the reserved categories requires to be allotted by rotation in a circular order among the Municipalities of a particular kind till the said category is represented in all the Municipalities of that kind and allotment to the said category cannot be repeated in any Municipality till a 58 cycle of rotation is completed. When a particular reserved category is represented in all the Municipalities of a particular kind, it would complete one cycle of rotation for that category and thereafter, a fresh cycle of rotation for that category shall commence. Every reserved category has to have an independent cycle of rotation. Every such cycle shall be independent of its previous or the succeeding cycle. Before completion of one cycle of rotation for a reserved category as explained above, if allotment to that category is repeated in any Municipality, it would be violative of the principle of rotation and such an allotment is illegal and is liable to be set aside. This is the principle of rotation intended by the Legislature under the two provisos referred to above. The object of rotation is to provide representation to each of the reserved categories to the offices of Chairpersons and Vice Chairpersons in all the municipalities. I may add that to complete a Cycle of rotation in respect of a particular reserved category, it may take only one circular movement or several circular movements among the municipalities of a particular kind like CMCs, TMCs etc. 59 depending upon the total number of offices reserved for that category in the State and the number of municipalities of that kind in the State. Several circular movements may become necessary due to several other reasons also. For eg., during a circular movement, when no candidate belonging to a particular reserved category is available in a municipality, then the allotment shall go to the next municipality in line in the circular order. Another example is, when a rule requires that both the offices in a Municipality shall not be allotted to the same category. There may be many such valid reasons for bypassing a Municipality and to go to the next in line available in the circular order or to go to a previous one which was bypassed earlier for any valid reason. This all depends upon the order of rotation laid down by the Rules framed in this behalf by the State Government. But under no circumstance, 'repetition' is permissible i.e. allotment of the office for the same reserved category for the second time in a Municipality before commencement of a fresh cycle of rotation. Any 'repetition' would be contrary to the principle of rotation. However, in 60 respect of the category of Backward classes, this principle of rotation is subject to the following proviso which is incorporated in both the Municipal Acts:

"Provided further that if no person falling under category "A" is available, offices reserved for that category shall also be filled by the persons falling under category "B" and vice versa;"

11.2 The following example would illustrate the principle of rotation:

If the office of President in a City Municipal Council is allotted to a particular reserved category, the said office cannot be allotted for the second time to the said category in that Municipal Council before completion of a cycle of rotation for that category i.e. till the said category is allotted the office of President in all the other City Municipal Councils once.

12. An elementary test to find out as to whether the principle of rotation is violated or not, is to examine as to whether any allotment to a reserved category is repeated in any Municipality before commencement of a fresh cycle of rotation for that category. If there is any allotment to any reserved category for the second time in a 61 Municipality before completion of a cycle of rotation or before commencement of a fresh cycle of rotation for that category, it would be a clear violation of the principle of rotation.

13. The principle of rotation as explained above is not followed by the State Government while making allotments in the impugned notifications. Allotments made to several reserved categories in a large number of municipalities are 'repetitions'. What is 'repetition' is already explained above. It is also not the case of the State Government that there are no 'repetitions' in the allotments made in the impugned notifications.

14. The Rules framed by the State Government under both the Municipal Acts do not provide for the principle of rotation as explained above. This is evident by the very allotments made in the impugned notifications. The State Government is duty bound to amend the existing rules or to frame new rules to give effect to the principle of rotation which is the mandate of the Legislature. 62

15. The State Government appears to be under an erroneous impression that whatever it provides under the rules would become the principle of rotation. The Government is empowered by the legislature under the two provisos referred to above to frame Rules to give effect to the principle of rotation as explained above being what the legislature intended by 'rotation'. The Rule making power given to the Government is not to frame its own policy of rotation as is done under Rule 73-A(5) of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations (Election) Rules, 1979. The said sub-rule reads as follows:

"73-A(5) The offices of the Mayor and Deputy Mayor in the City Corporations of the State to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes/Women, and Backward Classes for the subsequent terms be determined by the Government from time to time by taking into consideration such factors as deem fit:
Provided that if the reservation worked out to any category is less than 0.5%, then no offices of Mayor and Deputy Mayor be reserved to such category."

Under no circumstance, the Rules can permit 'repetition'. If any Rule permits or enables repetition, that Rule is ultra vires the principle of rotation and hence ultra vires the 63 Parent Act. The Rules, to be valid, should be framed in such a way that there shall be no scope for 'repetition'.

16. The State Government has acted against the principle of rotation in making the allotments in the impugned notifications resulting in violation of Article 243U of the Constitution of India.

17. The State Government shall now give effect to the principle of rotation as explained above by strictly avoiding 'repetition' of allotments to any reserved category by taking into consideration all the previous allotments made in each of the Municipalities as any contravention of the principle of rotation would be violative of the legislative mandate contained in Section 42(2A) of the Karnataka Municipalities Act and Section 10(1A) of the Municipal Corporations Act.

18. In the result, I make the following order:

(i) the allotment of offices of Chairpersons and Vice Chairpersons to the various reserved categories in the Municipal Corporations, City Municipal Councils, 64 Town Municipal Councils & Town Panchayats, made in the impugned notifications to the extent they are 'repetitions' (what is 'repetition' is explained above) are set aside. In other words, only such of those allotments which are 'repetitions' are set aside; the State Government shall redo such allotments by strictly avoiding 'repetitions'. This shall be done expeditiously and in any event within two months from today;
(ii) the State Government is also at liberty to redo all the allotments made in the impugned notifications in conformity with the principle of rotation as explained above within two months from today;
(iii) if there is any non compliance of this order by the State Government, it is needless to state that the party aggrieved is at liberty to move this Court on the contempt side in accordance with law.

The writ petitions are allowed in the above terms with no order as to costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE Yn/BNS/hkh.