Smt. Geetha Lakshmi W/O ... vs The Indian National Congress(I) on 29 September, 2011

[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

Smt. Geetha Lakshmi W/O ... vs The Indian National Congress(I) on 29 September, 2011

Bench: Mohan Shantanagoudar

5. Whether the act of the respondent_.._

attracts disqualification under the 

as prayed far?

6. What order?   

8. In support of their: respeC%:v_i"\je  3
parties have adduced ora! evidethche and  the
records. Based on the {eate;§_Eaf;_»'o"n"»a?eeord and after

hearéeg, the Deputy C0nfemisS§'o:ﬁe.;j"»t!f1_ei.Ei ﬁ.ha"t".there was

a direction   ~vCo1ragre.ss{'Ij iuooiiticai party
(commoniy  "a'3::..eO»i;:temp!ated by Jaw
to alt  efe<:1:ve:va:i':'j'-»C'oov'g;eeVs's§I) members of Town

Panchayat aVho€§_V%%theVt.__th.e"'eetitioner has violated the

 ,w.h_Ep. _?':'5E:;e: _f§)eg;:ut\ig'"C«en2mEssiener has further heicé that

tii*:--eg:%;et;§--*:.E;e*:1:t,e%'r*;he:s--«i.nde2ged in an ac: teniamoueting te

in"»,___:zeEe:i:e%%Ey  tee es? membership ef the Qﬁttig' te

_h_"_;.'_%,«§§.r£*:.r_'1c§': stzeheeioegs, Coesequeeziy, the §€§3i§§:'§/

£Ze'r%3ei2_§;sZs_«§€_:r2e:* has eésqeaééféecé tee eeiétgeeerg es the

i





 

-20

member, beiongfng to any political party,

shall be disqualified for being such Councilor"

or member-

a) If he has voluntarily given..::'o:'*~nvisVA..::' 

membership of salt}: '. '*4po-lit.i¢a:_ 

party; or

b) If he votes absté~in's~Vfro§'§: 
voting }f';':.,.A_ or_«'ilnte:§t;'on3._l/y remains
absent atffonwt'  of the

V 4e;:_nici;_:>é'l' "   :;'¥?I't1n:'Cipal

 2  _  j;--!?e'r}§f'ti'eyat, Zilla

V   Tésjldtk Panchayat,
tttt H  tényvlvtdirection issued
'  party to which he
 _  by any person or
'V  ,.§LJ1tho'r£t.y authorised by 1: If} this
A belialf without obtaining the prior
 *-permzssion of such party, person
or sigtnority and seen :rots'ng,
abstention or aosenee has met
been someones' E33»! seen poéftésef

party, person or §::st§?er§t;r w§tn:'n

so



 

M27,

is nothing on record to show that the said Sri

H.T.Kréshnegowda was authorised by Congﬁres~si(E)

politicai party to issue the whip:

According to the aheta';:ja«nt;"e--oh'test'shg I 

respondent; the whip was VEJss_ued«"b_§?'~--the 

State Unit and that therefote""~V:.%_t' shootid. 
that the Congress(I)    Such
a contention ea.r'g.not:.be:..jac.te'ote:ti';v_.'%':»'::".A'o"'mittedly, Sri
H .T. Krashneg;;ygg§a[;;[     Sri H .Abd ul
Wahad,the"A"£§:er§'e;§a_'t  t2ohgress(I) political
 to show that Sri Abdu!

Wahad, VS*-eé:retary of Congressﬂ) poiiticai

 AauthTor--i--s.eo by Congressﬁ) party to issue

a__.v;rh:_E$5.:"v«._«V'§*~:.%§':,z;e'xfer, the document at Anee><t1re-H; by

z%.fh».%4t:h 'saié St; ﬁtbdési Xﬁxfahad authorises Sri

 tf%.["?1Kt*v%s'hnegewﬁa to issue directions, reveaés that the

 so ﬁisézgi tﬁiataaé has autheréseé St;



,34t

I knew that Mr.GopaI and Mrﬁabu
were the officiai congress candidates on 

the day of efections. I did not know 

they were official candidates before I 

nomination. There was n_c_2..,c»hance'"L>f§:37e~~.: ~

being efecteci unanfmousiy 

the present.

There was a  eyed."  
withdrawai of   I vtketew
about the cant_1{de_tut'e" f'vof«._Mﬁ;.S_a.bu and
Mr,GopaI;q_'-- beferje  scrutiny of
nen7int;_«tienS*_,__ " II_h__év_e   any effort
   then. There
:V:'v_WaS .523.'f~-.ttﬁ';"ffiCtLtEt*§(   in withdrawing the
eee#fnatieh'e;* :_4"'f--._:Wénted to wait and see

' ~ the uf"eS§.:'ftS' of-t/Vie Contest. "'

 fjfﬁefeforemeetioneci admissions eencieeiveiy
'§;i=£'*e>¢evv.'tt€'et eetitéeeet very weﬁé knew abeet the

 eft4§c%.aV'§A.;eeteeieetzee ef Mr.Babe,, fer the east of

   .j?t7e~e%eeet ef Tewe P3?':C§'E&'§'3*{t Er: egeite 9%' the same,

 fehe ﬁéeé her eeménetéon end ceeteeted ageénet tee



_35s

official candidate of Congress(I) party, with the

support of 33(8) members and was etected. She

knew at the time of scrutiny of nomination?';3at'p.e;s4s;. '

about the officia! candidates of,.i,Congte'ss~{:"j'}..:';§é.rty.'_  

Despite the same, she did

nomination paper at ieast at-t_tieV_%timAe of 

it is not in   netVitionet's
candidature wa's~s.uppo'a't»eG~V' mem bE'1"S of
3D(S) poli€t;.c§ai'__  jof"V.'C'o'ngress(1) eiected
membtersi.  of the petitioner.
Addeciﬂtoitwé; has voted against the

officiai caiziiglicziatie-__o"f._VCo_'ngress(I) party in the elections

 Of..':§}"ié€e..j.P'EVeSEéé'Eii~§,...__i_RvaSmtsch as she voted in favour of

 ttée"otfie'iai"e:an.ditiate of 33(8) poiiticai party by raising

 t:anat};_:';§eni3zi "these facts eieatiy reveai that the

 pTetit'ii::_:€ei" has acted eanttary to the interest of the

it *i._7n»e§..i'tiea% eattgs te eghicit stie %§€:i{}§'EgS¥

V



16. It is by new we-ii settied by the catena...__of

decisions that voiuritariiy giving up is net syho'h3¥E?ie'Lu.s'vv.¢

with resignation; it has wider connotati"'o_i*i..ﬁ.:The»V.v_<'e M

person may voiuntariiy give upfihis*r:1e_m-:beV;?s«hip"*ofLl':

i?>0WC5i party Even though'_ he'----_h"as not..:forrIi£%\i«i'3,rVv"

tendered his resighatien to  
party. Even in the aizjsehce-'_V:ofi-_to'r:'m'eiAi'":re»sigi;ietion from
membership, eh v'.inferenic:eVA   from the
conduct  has voiuntarily

given  the political party to

which iutigment of the Apex

Court in the causiesof  vs. Union of India

&vj"V"ethei§%;ik E>"._:A%r'€~portﬁd" tttt is: AIR 1994 so 1558

iWgiai.iiii  J_ 

 1?:u:i} "ease ei' Dszmahendra Prasad Sing}:

f._'_ez€.e!{j7€'§°2e"ﬂéiefrmart, Biker Legfsiatfve Ceamcff 8:

 "_'i"e.tii'ef::, "reported in 2094(3) sec M: e we

V i.



.

L3.) "--J eiected as such as a candidate of a political party contested the Qarliamentary election as independent candidate. Under such facts circumstances, the Apex Court has-Iruled of such a member necessarily given up the membership of thejtaartyvh fromi}vhV§'tfV»h""he was elected as a MLC.

18. Section 4_3'{1)(af)"'of' "Act. clearly stipulates tha=t"'a"_C,oLir5._Vci'lEoV;<.__or_Va'-«"E'«i:«??arn_ber, belonging to any poi§ti::a'l"paA:r:i),.':'é:;:l:Vrali'he'dAEsq*vu~avl"if§ed for being such Councillor'-.gr Voluntarily given up his membership to? s'u.=:ln';.pAo~vi_§'té'c'al partyt Section 3(1)(a) of 'ﬂVlZ.l"'l't37"1' i'é--el:i'eii::rtio'n,.l *§c't°"i's"syhonymous ta §ara§:'ai3h~2 (l:){ag Schedtsie at {he Canstitntéon of l innia."-«._ ?§:'nsg'.i'~"iAne judgments of the Apex Cain: cétad intleirnrating paragraen-Z{3){a) of the "§e_r2ti*i .'_':'§c%*%.ea:;:"ia of the Canstitatéeng are apaiécabie tn tne K5'?

M33- facts of this case afso. The object behind the Tenth Scheduie of Constitution and Sectien 3(1) of Defect'iVo:'rj;..b_:'"'--_ Act is same. Both the provisions are interr.4o:ed.:'tfosé*"t curbing illegal defections and for m-a'§'nte1n§ig democratic process.

19. In the case of Kerala State Electiof, in AIR 2003 KERA£,.g§.__24Q'}" similar to the facts Court on a|9Dreciatéo'n"Vo't;':tVhe:':*:fn~ate.Vn'e'I hhoijwevcorci found that of the 12 wires ,S..Nazeerkhan,. ten votes were fmm the {_'DFV,'.=o%a_eV"'f'rem the independents and I-'fVtheA §ven*1a"i'nin{; one """ "his ewe vote' Under such ci'Ar'\:fi§n"-§ste.ne_es;f.t.n.e Ceert heié in the seéé matter that h Sn §'§ezeev__:f":<§*w;:ei'nATE:ee comteseee the eéeetéoes with the H"":74."se';.;%;:2:t:;fi ettfze eeeesite free: Les £3?" eee he get ._e_.§e{fte*:i';' iinéer seen eéreenrésteeeesg tee Ceert. we _ 5"':

V "($3- reveais that the petitioner has voiuntarlly given up her membership of Congressﬁ) politécaé party to which she beiongs. Therefore, the Deputy Commissierier is justified in concluding that the petitioner is liable to disquaiified under the provisions of Section the Defectioh Act. Since the con__ci.us_§oh _.'réaeh_ed"':by{ the Deputy Commissioner is jigs: .3_'_h€',i' pir_o'p_e:"r,:"

interference is called for. Hence, the writ pét.if;.o_n .'l'al;lsvl"aii_d_i'accordinciiy the geggi' ??'?'E""'%,.v"~»a iii? "ii?

wég _"i'eji:fr1i<~ ~

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court