Karnataka High Court
G B T Manjula vs The Chief Zonal Manager on 12 November, 2013
Author: A.N.Venugopala Gowda
Bench: A.N. Venugopala Gowda
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA
WRIT PETITION NOS.35539-35541/2011 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. G.B.T. MANJULA,
W/O G.B.T. RAMESH,
AGED 35 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSE WIFE.
2. SMT. S. BHAVANI,
W/O S. ESHAPPA,
AGED 35 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEWIFE.
3. R. GURURAJ,
S/O R. SIDDAPPA,
AGED 28 YEARS,
OCC:BUSINESS.
ALL ATEH PETITIONERS ARE R/O.
TELIGI VILLAGE,
TQ:HARAPANAHALLI - 583 137,
DISTRICT:DAVANAGERE.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI JAGADEESHGOUD PATIL, ADV.)
AND:
1. THE CHIEF ZONAL MANAGER,
INDANE OIL CORPORATION LTD.,
INDANE REGIONAL OFFICE,
UNITY BUILDINGS,
2
4TH FLOOR, J.C.W. ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560002.
2. SRI K. ANKUSH,
S/O. MALLIKARJUN KANNIHALLI
21 YEARS, OCC:STUDENT,
R/O. TEACHER'S/SIDDESHWARA COLONY,
NANDI COMPLEX, ADJACENT TO JMFC COURT,
HARAPANAHALLI - 583 131
DISTRICT:DAVANAGERE.
3. THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
TELIGI GRAMAPANCHAYAT,
TELIGI, HARAPANAHALLI TALUK,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI B.K.SRIDHAR, ADV. FOR R1;
SRI SATHISH B.V., ADV. FOR R3;
R2 SERVED)
THESE PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE
SELECTION OF 2ND RESPONDENT AS R.G.G.L.V. AT TELIGI
VILLAGE OF HARAPANAHALLI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT,
AS PER LETTER OF INFORMATION DATED 24.9.2011, SELECTED
BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT AT ANNEXURE-N AND FURTHER
DECLARE THE SELECTION OF 2ND RESPONDENT AS R.G.G.L.V
AT TELIGI VILLAGE AS NULL AND VOID AND CONTRARY TO
CLAUSE 3(b) OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 29.3.2011,
PUBLISHED IN VIJAYA KARANATAKA DAILY NEWSPAPER
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D, ETC.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
3
ORDER
These writ petitions were filed to quash the selection of the 2nd respondent - K. Ankush as RGGLV of Telgi Village of Harapanahalli Village, Davanagere Taluk, vide Annexure-N and declare the said selection as null and void.
2. Heard learned advocates and perused the writ record.
3. Respondent No.1 has filed counter on 14.03.2012 in which it has been stated that 2nd respondent
- K. Ankush having become a successful candidate after draw of lot, when field verification was undertaken, 2nd respondent having failed to submit the residential certificate obtained from the competent authority, his candidature was cancelled and a letter dated 21.12.2011 was issued. It has been further stated that upon cancellation of candidature of K. Ankush, re-draw of lot was performed among remaining five eligible candidates, amongst whom writ petitioners were also participants and the draw of lot having taken place on 27.01.2012, one 4 B.Satish became the successful candidate and the Committee is in the process of completing the field verification of the selected candidate.
4. Rejoinder statement has not been filed by the petitioners.
5. In view of the clear assertion by the 1st respondent that the 2nd respondent's candidature was cancelled on account of his failure to produce the residential certificate issued by the competent authority, the grievance of the petitioners as against the selection of the 2nd respondent does not survive for consideration.
In the result, writ petitions are dismissed. However, it is open to the petitioners to question the selection of B. Satish, if there were to be any legal infirmity.
No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE sac*