K.P Krishnachari S/O Late ... vs The Deputy Commissioner on 21 February, 2011

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

K.P Krishnachari S/O Late ... vs The Deputy Commissioner on 21 February, 2011

Bench: B.V.Nagarathna

 '~  _ 1v1A:{A:\§T§;'sH;s.£~1OsMA'rH, ADV.)

IN '.I'}'"iiZ .HIGH COURT? OF KARNATAKA XXI' EEANGALORE
DATE:£} 'FI"I'i'S 'F}"1IE 2 1  DAY OF F"EBRUARY§ 2Cf}.,.\1

B {*3 F0 RE

THE HON*B:,1:; £\/IRSJUSTICE £3.V.NAGA¥§:2\'FE-i:?§I}3;   M

WRET p1+:TmON NOS,7239/20.11-'& 741 1--}'2Qv]:'}{'V{IB;R:F;S}'}-.' V

BETWEEN:

1. K.P.KRISHNACHAR1  

S/O IATE3 PUTFASWAMYCHARI

AGED ABOUT 44,.YEARS-------- _  *_ 
MEMBER HUNSUR .T.M. C, WARD NO. 7
R/O BEHIND MEI)ARA'3£;--H;f1): ' f_   _
EALKUMIKEJ, HUNSUR. ' " 

D1STREC"f'MYSO.RE V' ' w 

sv

KANINJX /go  ._(}A.DI:. RAN OA

,AGED ' Af3,OU"'r 45 Y~F_.ARS--
MEMBER'14iL?AN'SUR_'£";M.C. WARD N021
Rxo POURAIiARMEKA COLONY
HUN$UR. I)[_S'F.RIC3Tf.*OV1\/IYSORE

... PETETIONERS

 O    "

E O  THEv'V':3IéiPU*1*Y COMMISSIONER

4 L3

E\€{YS~0RE, DISTRICT MYSORE

O SQMEGOWIDA @ LORRY SOMEGOWDA
" S,/'O LATEB MOQDALA GOWDA
 AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS

TE--1E PREZSII)I3N'I', HUNSUR TALUK
JD{S} I->O1;1'T1cAL PARTY. E--IWUNSUREZ
DISTRECI' EVIYSOREE

3. ii.N.CE"fANDRASE"'I§§KAR 8/ O I,A'i'E§ NANJEGOW"Z3A
MEMBELR, H.§}I"~ESUR '§.M.'C. VW--':RE'.) M018

3%

,./°"""'"'



R/O it 1074. E9'-'\f{1{}O\:\f'I)A I-BECEDE
HUNS'UR
D IS'I"RIC'f' MYSORE';

4. HAZARATE-E1" JAN S./O MOI-IAMMED AMEEIQ ' '~----- " '
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS  A
MEMBER HUNSUR T.M.C. WARD 1\IO.; I4 1. 

R/O # I822, NIZAM MOI»IAL;LA'; 'II=3A_ZAAE.. I§a 'OAI):)'----i'«' 

HUNSUR, DISTRECT MYSOREEZ

5. STATE OE E{ARN.ATAKA' 
BY ITS SECRETARY  * 
MUNCIPAL DEPARTMEN'I"=.._ ' _
M.S.BUII,DING  _
BANGALORE

 H  ' ;V  RESPONDENTS

{By Sm': }§.'£'.§€A1%}?§\'?}E§.A137'E1I3;SADI I%ICC».I.?7I?OIi< R} R5, SRI.SANC},A"1\ZI~T<;Si¥7£,E..B__;?QR R4, R3] THESE'VW,a£3'SARE~.§'I1,l£;1") UNER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF 'I"}IE' CON'STITU"E.ION OF' INDIA PRAYING TO QUAS1-I THE IIvI_PUCNE_D PASSED BY THE DEPUTY CO_MMISS'IONER,-._IvIYSO--I%IE DATED 8.2.2011, REJECTINO IA-I TO'*3__VIDE '.ANNExI;REmC, AND GIVE DIRECTION '1}{_B;..I_ DEPUTY--«"COMA/IISSIONER TO PERMIT THE _ ,' AIAETITIOIIERS TO EXAMINE THE WITNESSES BY I'A.I,LOIYIMI"'IiI£'E IA 1~3.

'TI--~I_E.Sj::j'I>ETITIOI\IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY 1§l{~1ARE\'IG_ TI--IIS DAY, COURT MADE THE EOLLOwII\IG:m ' ORDER ' '.ITI*I<>LIgIT IEIESC Wm. I3CI.IE.iO'ITS are pGS:%E.€'.d {OT prC1i.:1IIIIa'I°y __i"IE21I*i:"IgI w;".é,h {f{}I"§S€I'lfl Of '(.3363 CO'III1:-K31 apgasz-I'I°II"Ig; 011 bcﬁh

-SEIEES. ii. EIEATIE IEYESEE}-n

2. Tlie pei.i'i'.io1':ei°s in ihessc V'».«-"flit. _;3ei:ii;.ioi:1$ have chalierigeci the order passed by the first. resporiclerii. ~ Depiiiy C()l"}1lI1lSSi{)11€1' dated 8/2/201} and are seeking permission to examine the witnesses in respect of which I.As.l ioe ..l_l1';were filed by t.h.em. ii. is a. case of the petitioners tli£4ii"'ljii€§}r';_1':l5lt3 meitrlbers of the Town Municipal C0FpO1fE3_li_(i'I'}.V o:ij"i;1_ui~._su_::

Town .E.\I1unicipalii.y, elected from That the election for the pO§it_ of Pi'esi.de11t x.V2iL::. be iield on 16 /8/2010 and whip_:hacl.V-ibe"e_r1VVgiven by' the Jaiiaia Sal {S€CL21§;§"}_ PaZ"iij[,:'m?f~*i§.'.§:'if1.V{§i"}§'. or b3/tiie Party' high command. That on aecoLii3ii=o'i':'Virieo1i.ikie:i1ence and certain ;)1*oblVeme,"i;hev.peiii'ioi1ei's'_'dicl attend the meeting held on 16/8/2010 ir1*'e1ri"independeiit candidate was elected as the Iﬁreeiclveni..V'--oi'A'*éEié"'.Town Municipal Council, Hunsur. J V' _ RespvoAi1derit':s"?;"to ii had filed a compiaini under Section ..::V4{.i}(b] oi." the Kamataka Local Authorities .'(}?icoliibiii(VﬁI1_ Defeciion] Act, hereina.fi,er, referred io as the 'Aciﬂ against the petitioners. The peioilio.r.1.ers had filed A:ob}'~ecLi<>11s to the said COlI'lpl.aiF1'£, coniendirig that their Vliabsenee on 16/8/QOEO was u:r1.i.1i1.i.entie11z1I and inevitabie in as mueh as reepo1'1cieni. No.2 was liospiialised as an iiipzitieiii: imm 34/8/2010 to i8/8/201.0, as he had u.i1ciei"gone s~::.;.i'geryi i*{espoi":dez3i'. No, i. commeiiced enqiiiyy on the eempla.i11'L made axlci the ::?£)mpEai.I1aI1t.'s evidence has been e0rI1p}.e£'ed a'r1.d in order to prove their eeee. the pet.i'ti(mere }1e.1'ein wazmieed E0 examine two witllesses namely. Dr.M.Bha-1nukuI.11ar and Dr.B.L.Ravikuma1~ and h4e.ne<;:e_:,'e~Lhey ﬂied I.A,I. They also filed an app1ic.=:-rtien Rule 7(a) r/w Section 151. Code of Civil PF()C€:(3:L11%(3.,:(CPC)_::{.(')= issue su11e1mons to the said \viL11ess.esfiv r'net11,1i.One'dV'=-ei_npﬂde witness list» which applictatien w*aS".n:irr1berC'Ci' 1.A. £I é112<;i°. had filed another application 'feVr_V'Vcnnd01iin.L§ tﬁe (ie}ay under Order XV: Rule E foe i"Ve::~{');:'»._:e:',1vi1'e1gg; the ease and for examining the wit'.nesses,'T' ftile,éi1§§j?_i_eE:1ti0r1s were filed afterafghe evjfdF:_nC«e'30Vf 'thve"petiLi0ners herein had Commenced. However, "respQ;icE..e'r)tV"~NeI.J" has rejected. the applications With.OVL1L asusig191i11g'--a1iy reaso.11s nor giving an opportunity to exafniiee the said "" "Doctors. The said orders are hence *._:ha'i1eV:1geLi'Vi;1 these wrlt petitions.

,I?haVe heard the iearned co1:1r1.sei for p€E.ii',iO1'l€1'S; _1ear:ievd Govt:. Pleader for respondents "I and 5 and the ' Viearned eemzisel for i'€Sp()I1dE3I'1'i.S 2 10 4.

4, iii, ezzbmiiied on iaehalf of {he peiifiexlers ihai:

when a 55er*;'.eu.s-3 aHeg_',ai:i<:»r1 has been made ag;fzxi.12e{. {hem by :*e;<§;>e:1::§::%':2E 1'~;'es'e.,2 E,.=:_> 6%. éE?;e.j;; ';"m.::~3§ bezir ;;'.;iVe:;.': 21:': i:>§3;; :}:"'::::1.i'E,3? ﬁe ff pmve their czase or oi,1i1e1"w'i:3<:n the eo11seqt.,:e;";ee would also be eerious in as mue'n as; they wonid sufiex' dEs;(;1.121Iif3c:ai.i()n.« Under the eireun1s1.a.nees§ the petitioners herein furnished the witness; fist: and soughi. for issuance of s11.n1Inon_ds-.e_'te.._the Doctors but: the respondent. No.1 has not reason as to why the said ap'pIicat,i()n »-- 333.34 wrongly dismissed the said appiiioatiozn, Heed»fL1.:f1.he'r=subiézgits that in order to prove their case, Vibe" petitioniervs nu};stVdbe°. given an opportunity to prodiiee' their"eV1&deneeV':]3efore the aLii,.1":o:*'i'L'3z, so as to' Alji1A'1€'iVI': "1.§1_e::n1e~t:i"siii;3 the Town Municipal Corporation. He._Vt'ri.eV19ef1"or'e~, é'ﬁ1.bniits that the order passed on awpfpiicraetiien has to be set aside and the writ petition hasé to 5' ~ 5. Per;go'I1'i.ra,x'eo'unse} for res_ponden1;:s 2 to 3 whiie eSi1paf:)dftix1g._'the passed by the first respondent has I Vé:.fgatved.t't.I{1ait: same does not call for any interference in these urritjisetitioxls.

I , 0"... Max-';'.ng regard to the fact ihai. a complaint. has xbdeen fiied under Section 4 of the Act against the petitioners ":he:"e,=1.11. eom;,end1Tn§g ihszll their absence on the daie of votirng nmnely E6/8/201.0 'W&1:'?: «:1e:i§be;."21i,e and ':'ha:':: they had v1'.oIat.ed €:.%":e 'ea-'E.':*;§f:a. \><,~*E':i<:%EI; amass; 1*:'s2:~;m%<§ bf; '{;E'":~e ;:§2;-'aféjg §3:es;%5a§€£€;%§2?:__; an oppo:'t:m'1it.y to the pet.iE:ione1*s Etereim to prove their ease musst. be given ssihce, it is their case that: their absence was not ir1t,e1'1t.io11a1 but on aecou1'1t. of the genuine 1'eas0ns_.__, since peteitione.r No.2 was hospit,al.ised and evidence to that is sougght. to be produced. When the contest;i11g;V.. contend that the reasons assignedbybthe petitic>f1_ie.rs§"i'o};:t}:teii°" » absence are not: genuine, then a11Vo[3}?g'01'iimioty I1'1='Q1:~:t"1:V$'e-.. given to the petitioners to p1~ove.*toh.«_:i1~ eé.:ae.' since':;t1;r._de:i:i.a1 of; opportunity to establish their L'(:«3_se.Vwo'L1.I'Ci .1feSi11t}in serious <'.on.Seq:..tenC.e in a3-'_the.pTet.it§ef;e§Ee etand to be disquaiified.

H eifet111'1stahees, the order impugned in these "wrtt._peti.tiotf'i's.Vd'ate(;l._S;'2/20 1.1 rejecting 1.As.I to III by respondehn-t._ hNo.]'e__is'._véei.,:7 aside The first respondent is direeteci to git/'e opport'L1r1ity to the petitioners to examined , ,:,171'e De-ue't€)t;s.j.vho have issued the Medieai Certi.['icates to the =petit;ione1:.§.".VCo;1sidering the fact. that the proceeding before "t,he*first I'e}Sponcient. is under the Karnataka Loea1Aut,horities Prfohib--it.io'1:":o{ Det"eet:io11 Act, 1977 and having regard to _Seetior:-- 4 of the said Act, which has p1"€SC'l'§b(;"d three rnor1th.s '' 'as; _ .'i,1'1€: period for disposal of the proceeding, the iirei. ?;*e.s;:}<:>r1cieni. is directed to diepc)se of he p1"C){'.€*é3 11:15; pen.di:1g E/_>=::*.i'o:"e him 'iX;'i'EI}E.i£1. 2:3; gzzerioet of fE:::t.::" we7<aks fzrom €.ei3«é;i§e§,a ex At {his st,3.ge, it is S11bII{1i'{1.€d that. on E5/2/201}, the matéer WE-13% p<>55t':€{§ Ebr a.1'gL1:11E:13i:s. Therefarézg. Iearneti C1()'V'E' p1(:'£1C1€*}.' is di1'ec:t.ed to eomrmmicate to the f'i1*st I'(:353}5{3'I1f}€jI1.1 about this order.

Sri R.I3.S21r1games11._ 166-1£'1'1€('i,..£1Q1.1.f1Sff.1V iS" ';)'t?.E'I i}i,ii€Ci fgci ' file power for responde1"1t".s 2 and 419113.

. V A§§§§§ "'rnvs

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court