Karnataka High Court
Sri. Ravindra Swamy vs The Returning Officer on 27 April, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:3715
EP No. 200003 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
ELECTION PETITION NO. 200003 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. RAVINDRA SWAMY
S/O KALLAYYA SWAMY
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO.8-11-254,
RAGHAVENDRA COLONY,
BIDAR - 585 401.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAVI B PATIL, SRI. VEERANI V NANDI AND
SRI. SARAVANA S, ADVOCATES)
AND:
Digitally 1. THE RETURNING OFFICER
signed by
CHAITHRA A AURAD CONSTITUENCY,
Location: BIDAR DISTRICT - 585 329.
HIGH
COURT OF 2. SRI. PRABHU CHAVAN
KARNATAKA
S/O BHAMLA
AGED ABOUT MAJOR,
NO. 104, GHAMSURU BAI THANDA BONTI
AURAD-B-TALUK
BIDAR DISTRICT - 585 329.
...RESPONDENTS
(V/C/O/DATED 24.08.2023
SMT. ARCHANA TIWARI, AAG FOR R1(MA NOT FILED);
V/C/O/DATED 01.12.2023
SRI. RAJKUMAR KORWAR, AGA FOR R1;
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:3715
EP No. 200003 of 2023
HC-KAR
V/C/O/DATED 01.12.2023
SRI. DHANANJAY HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI. VINAYAKA B AND SRI. GANESH S KALABURAGI,
ADVOCATES FOR R2)
THIS ELECTION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 81
OF THE REPRESENTATION OF PEOPLE ACT, PRAYING TO
DECLARE THAT ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT RETURNING
OFFICER REJECTING THE NOMINATION OF THE PETITIONER TO
52 ASSEMBLY CONSTITUENCY AURAD-B TALUK, BIDAR
DISTRICT ASSEMBLY CONSTITUENCY IS IMPROPER TO STATE
ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS 2023 IS IMPROPER, DATED 21.04.2023
AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
ORAL ORDER
In the captioned election petition, the following reliefs are sought:
"i) Declare that order of the 1st respondent returning officer rejecting the nomination of the petitioner to 52 Assembly Constituency Aurad-B Taluk, Bidar District, assembly constituency is improper to State Assembly Elections 2023 is improper, dated 21.04.2023 as per Annexure-AA.
ii) Declare the election result of the 2nd respondent returning candidate to state Legislative -3- NC: 2026:KHC-K:3715 EP No. 200003 of 2023 HC-KAR Assembly Elections 2023 to 52 Assembly Constituency is void dated 16.05.2023 at Annexure-D.
iii) Direct the Returning Officer/Election Commission to conduct fresh election to 52 Assembly Constituency Aurad-B Taluk, Bidar District, afresh for year 2023; and
iv) Pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice."
2. Learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 have placed reliance on a reported judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.No.200053/2024 and connected matters, which pertains to the very caste status now asserted by the petitioner. The said judgment, being directly on the point and rendered by a Coordinate Division Bench, carries significant precedential value and therefore warrants due consideration by this Court.
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:3715 EP No. 200003 of 2023 HC-KAR
3. Having regard to the relevance of the issues adjudicated therein, this Court deems it appropriate to advert to the findings and conclusions recorded by the Division Bench in the aforesaid judgment. More particularly, paragraphs 76 to 78 of the judgment assume significance, as they encapsulate the ratio decidendi on the controversy relating to caste determination and its evidentiary parameters.
4. Accordingly, paragraphs 76 to 78 of the said judgment are extracted hereinbelow for ready reference:
"76. Accordingly, it is clear that even taking note of the position of law that the Courts cannot widen the interpretation of the notification of castes detailed as scheduled castes, there could be no stretching of the caste 'Beda Jangama' or 'Budaga Jangama' to include the Jangama belonging to veerashaiva lingayat community.
77. Thus, once material on record would indicate that the petitioner Ravindra Swamy to be a 'Lingayat', the question of him claiming the benefit of 'Beda Jangama' does not arise. Mere grant of 'Beda Jangama' Certificate to a member of the family would -5- NC: 2026:KHC-K:3715 EP No. 200003 of 2023 HC-KAR not permit issuance of certificate to other claimant if they are not entitled as they belong to 'Veerashaiva Lingayat' Community.
78. Accordingly, the following ORDER:
i) W.A.No.200053/2024 is allowed and consequently, the order dated 11.10.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.201181/2023 is set aside;
ii) W.A.No.200162/2024 is allowed;
iii) W.A.CROB No.200001/2024 is dismissed in light of setting aside of the order of learned Single Judge in W.P.No.201181/2023."
5. In the light of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.200053/2024 and connected matters, this Court is of the considered view that the very lis presented in the captioned election petition does not survive for adjudication. The Division Bench, while allowing the appeal preferred by the State, has conclusively determined the -6- NC: 2026:KHC-K:3715 EP No. 200003 of 2023 HC-KAR caste status of the present petitioner and has unequivocally held that the petitioner does not belong to 'Beda Jangama', which is notified as a Scheduled Caste, but in fact belongs to the 'Lingayat' community. The Division Bench has further upheld the action of the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner in declining to recognize and act upon the caste certificate relied upon by the petitioner. The said findings, rendered upon detailed consideration of the material on record, strike at the very root and substratum of the claim put forth in the present election petition, wherein eligibility is intrinsically founded on the assertion of belonging to a Scheduled Caste.
6. It is also not in dispute that the aforesaid judgment of the Division Bench has attained finality, having been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (C) Nos.31506-31508/2025. Once the foundational issue of caste status, which forms the bedrock of the petitioner's eligibility to contest the election, stands conclusively negatived by a binding judgment inter parties, the -7- NC: 2026:KHC-K:3715 EP No. 200003 of 2023 HC-KAR continuance of the present election petition would be rendered wholly untenable. This Court, while exercising jurisdiction under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, does not sit in appeal over the judgment of a Division Bench, nor can it undertake a collateral re- examination of findings which have attained finality up to the level of the Hon'ble Apex Court. The controversy sought to be raised in the election petition thus stands concluded, leaving no triable issue to be adjudicated.
7. It is also pertinent to note that the petitioner, despite the matter being listed on successive dates, has neither appeared in person nor through counsel. The record would indicate that there has been absolutely no representation on behalf of the petitioner on the last four dates of hearing. This persistent non-appearance, coupled with the fact that the foundational issue stands concluded against the petitioner by binding precedent, clearly demonstrates lack of prosecutorial diligence and reinforces -8- NC: 2026:KHC-K:3715 EP No. 200003 of 2023 HC-KAR the conclusion that the petition does not merit further consideration.
8. For the foregoing reasons, this Court is of the considered opinion that the election petition is devoid of any surviving cause of action and continuation of proceedings would amount to an exercise in futility. Accordingly, the election petition stands dismissed in limine in view of the binding judgment rendered by the Division Bench, as affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, which has rendered the foundational issue non-existent.
SD/-
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CA List No.: 19 Sl No.: 1