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 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri T V Ramamurthy vs State Of Karnataka on 19 April, 2010

Author: A.S.Bopanna

Bench: A.S.Bopanna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF APRIL 20105
BEFORE   "

THE HON'BLE MRJUSTECE A.S.BOp;A'i\INA: "  

WRIT PETITION NOS. 12448453" 01? 2010  

BETWEEN

1.

SR1 T.V. RAMAMURTHY,  

S/O VASANTHAPPA,  
AGED ABOUT 35v'z"EARS;*" -  
RESIDENT OF THTNBLU-_  . "   
MUGLUR GRAMA PAPECHAYPCT   .  .
SARJAPUR HOBLI,     
BANGALORE D%RB:AN:{Df;;552~121_V '  '

SIB.-p._RA.._}U '$3-/Q B1L1,APpA_.D.Y.,

AGED ABQUTV36 

R/O DINNUR; PANCHAYAT
 TALUK .  " "

BANGALORE U RBANDISTRICT

..  C. MU'N.iRAJLZ-',

. '- Ac+B.D'vABOUT'4'6'YBARS

. w ., _ /O.c.y11A:Nm3PA,
" V _ "Rb/'OaKO"IvIMASANDRA,

* .,_MU'i"fA_NALLUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT,

 DOIVIMASANDRA POST, SARJA?UR HOBLI

AN-EKAL TALUK, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT.

:  SR1".¢T.c.KRTSNKApPA
, _ "AOED ABOUT 42 YEARS
' "S/O CHIKKAMUNIYAPPA

R/O THIRUMAGONDANAHALLI
NERALUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT
NERALUR POST. SARJAFUR I-IOBLI

A



11.

SR1. V. KRISHNAMUR'I'I"IY,

AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS

S / O VENKATAPPA.

R/ O KEMPAVADERAHALLI.

KASABA HOBLI, SIDI HOSAKOTE POST,
BYAGADADENAHALLI GRAMA PAN CHAYAT}

ANEIKAL TALUK, BANGALORE URBAN D1Hs;T._,,_ A Z" 1%

SR1. PRAKASH
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS

S/O LATE VENKATAREDDY, ._ V.  - ~
R/O SUNAWARA,MANAI{A1'IAHALLI POST; '
MANAKANAHALL1 GRANLA=PANcHAYAT;'~.O  _
ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE _URBAN1).IS'i'. ii

SR1 THIMMAREDD-an _ _ 

S/O MUNISWAMY REDDY7  
AGED ABOUT 45  ' A 

R/O MUm1.ATT1v:LLAG'E,   'V .
sAMAND.UR;G'RAMA PANC_HAYAT',' 
BANGALORE,UR'3AN"DIST;" 

SRI 1\/L' LATE MUNEYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 40 YRSI." "

R/O ARGADDE,7ARA_GADDE GRAM PANCAHYAT.
ANEKAL TALUK '
_~ '-'BANGALORE .U_ DIST.

 _  KUMA S/O NANJAREDDY
 AGED  33 YRS,
'-.B.}~IO.SAH;ALLI VILLAGE

'  HAND_F.fIVAHALLI POST.

. H' ..

"YAMARE GRAMA PANCHAYATANEKAL TALUK,

BA§__\TGALORE URBAN DISTRICT.

_  SRINIVASA REDDY,
S/O T.1\/IUNISWAMY REDDY

AGED ABOUT38 YRS.
R/O MARASUR VILLAGE, MARASUR GRAMA

.33..

as



. «.  _ Av "EANGA1..ORE.

PAN CHAYAT, ANEKAL TALUK,
BANGALORE URBAN DIST.

16. SR1. MOHAN BAEU S/O RAMAREDDY
AGED AEOUT 32 YRS,
KACHANAYAKANAHALLI,
HENNAGARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT
ANEKAL [T] " 

BANGALORE URBAN DIST   ..:1;..;'EI?f3TI'I'I'ON'ERS.I_'«

(BY SR1: V.LAKSHMINARAYAI\?, IA,Dv.,Vj'   V

AND

1. STATE OFKARNATAKA,   1.
REPRESENTED BYT.HE1.PE_INcII5AL,'~~.  
SECRETARYOF R§jRAL'}S:EVELQPM'ENT,&
PANCHAYAT§1»'\g1 DEPARTMENT', VIDHANA SOUDHA,
DR. AM'BP3DKA_F:§ RO,_A}__D}~._  ' ' I
BANOEI,ORE_5600011; I  

2. THE DEPUTY' COM_MI~ssIOI~IER,
BANGALORELURBAN-.DIsT*R1sT,

BANCf;ALORE_. '  =   "

3. THE STATE EI.;Ec TIO"N COMMISSION,
~ -::~;EPREsENTED__BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

... RESPONDENTS

A A.G.A FOR R1 .3: R2

' SR1 K.N'.'PIfff&NINDRA, ADV, FOR R3)

 WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER

 ._"AR'rI_cLEs 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
 "«.PEAYINO TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER
1  THE "CASE OF THE PETITIONERS FOR ROTATION OF

VRESERVATION IN TERMS OF THE KARNATAKA

 PANAHCYAT RAJ [RESERVATIONS AND ZILLA

I



PANCHAYATS BY ROTATION] RULES, 1998 AND DECLARE
THAT THE REPITETION OF THE RESERVATION IS TOTALLY
UNCONS'I'I'E'U'i'IONAL AND CONTRARY To ABOVE RULES
AND ETC.  

THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR P1?.~;';='~,I.,.'11«z\',r.I'1_'_N'.~*cs;1§ii:'

THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWINQEF

ORDER

;

These petitions are assailing dated 18.1.2010 whereundern' the Vre.s«ervati:ons and rotations in respect 'the eiections have been affected.

"~tXjh_endVare taken up today, Sri R.Devdasi Government Advocate has brought to'u"m.v no'tic'e notification dated 19.4.2010, Ad'"Wliereii7i't.htecalendar of events have been announced in ~ Grama Panchayath elections.
d in View of the same, there is a bar for this 'A * Court tinder Articie 243-0 of the Constitution of India to .' entertain these petitions. However, the teamed counsel for the petitioners points out that the petitioners have '£3?
to..,1eamed* oounsei for'; petitioners. made a representation dated 13.4.2010 to the Deputy Commissioner bringing to his notice certain irreguiarities in the notification.
4. Insofar as the said 1'(3pI'€3S€'}1."l1Z£7Lti.(:>Vi'i' concerned, no opinion is eXpress'ed,"'s.inc.e it 'opVe'n7«'fo'I'; the Deputy Commissiofler xiii)ii".V_x1oo}{.,'._'t.o,'pinto it representation keeping in the "'oo=nstitntiona1 provisions, if it is open 'to do"so." is
5. In telrns ofV_thesT€*""'petitions stand disposed of with noi'o-rder toeosts. ~
6. The a;iei;em;¢a:e.ae¢py of this order shall be made.e_avai.Ia"b1<j_pAV'to,y_ the "learned Additional Government Advocate-ifsought'and hand delivery may be made Sd/e ?}'DGE