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 6, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

N Ravisagar Naidu vs State Of Karnataka on 23 December, 2020

Author: R Devdas

Bench: R Devdas

                          -1-


 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2020

                        BEFORE

         THE HON' BLE MR.JUSTICE R DEVDAS

     WRIT PETITION NO.15494 OF 2020 (LB-ELE)

BETWEEN

N RAVISAGAR NAIDU
S/O P NARASAPPA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.44/1,
POOJARI CHIKKAPPAIAH LAYOUT
AVALAHALLI VIRGONAGAR POST
BENGALURU EAST TALUK
BENGALURU-560 049
                                           ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.PRASANN KUMAR P., ADVOCATE)


AND


1.    STATE OF KARNATAKA
      BY ITS SECRETARY TO DEPARTMENT OF RURAL
      DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYATH RAJ
      M.S. BUIDLING
      BENGALURU-560 001.

2.    THE RETURNING OFFICER
      AVALAHALLI GRAM PANCHAYATH
      AVALAHALLI
      VIRGONAGAR POST
      BENGALURU EAST TALUK
      BENGALURU-560 049.
                            -2-


3.   THE KARNATAKA STATE ELECTION COMMISSION
     NO.8, 1ST FLOOR, KSCMF BUILDING ANNEXE
     CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU-560 052.
     REPRESENTED BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY.

4.   THE ELECTION COMMISSIONER
     KARNATAKA STATE ELECTION COMMISSION
     NO.8, 1ST FLOOR, KSCMF BUILDING ANNEXE,
     CUNNINGHAM ROAD
     BENGALURU-560 052.

5.   THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
     K.G. ROAD,
     BENGALURU-560 009.

6.   N.DEVARAJA
     S/O LATE. PATEL NANJAPPA
     AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
     RESIDING AT CHEEMASANDRA GRAMA
     BIDARAHALLI HOBLI
     BENGALURU EAST TALUK
     VIRGONAGAR POST
     BENGALURU-560 049.

7.   M/S HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LTD
     ENGINE DIVISION
     POST BOX NO. 1787
     CV RAMAN NAGAR POST
     BENGALURU 560 017.
                                          ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.K.R.NITHYANANDA, HCGP FOR R1, R3 & R5)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING ISSUE A WRIT
OF MANDAMUS TO R2 AND R3 TO CONSIDER THE OBJECTIONS
FILED BY THE PETITIONER WITH RESPECT TO THE
CANDIDATURE OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT IN GRAM PANCHAYATH
ELECTION, WARD NO.6 AVALAHALLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK
SCHEDULED TO BE HELD ON 27.12.2020 (PRODUCED VIDE
ANNEXURES 'D' AND 'G' RESPECTIVELY) AND CONSEQUENTLY
ISSUE A DIRECTION TO THE R2 TO DISQUALIFY THE 6TH
                                  -3-


RESPONDENT FROM CONTESTING IN GRAM PANCHAYATH
ELECTION, WARD NO.6 AVALAHALLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK
SCHEDULED TO BE HELD ON 27.12.2020.


     THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                               ORDER

R. DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

The prayer in this writ petition is to direct the 2nd respondent-Returning Officer to consider the objections filed by the petitioner and reject the candidature of the 6th respondent, who has filed the nomination for the election to the post of a member of Avalahalli Grama Panchayat, Avalahalli Ward No.6.

2. The Returning Officer is required to scrutinize the nomination of the candidates in terms of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Conduct of Election) Rules, 1993. No direction can be given to the Returning Officer to scrutinize and reject the candidature of a person who was filed nomination. It is for the Returning Officer to consider the nomination papers in accordance with law. Moreover, when once the Calendar of Events are announced, no orders which would interfere in the process of election could be made by this Court as authoritatively held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of -4- N.P.Ponnuswami Vs. Returning Officer, Namakkal Constituency and others, reported in AIR 1952 SC 64.

3. Moreover, in view of the statutory bar imposed under Section 15 of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, which provides that no election to fill a seat or seats in a Gram Panchayat shall be called in question except by an election petition presented on one or more of the grounds specified in sub-section (1) of section 19 and section 20 before the Designated Court within whose territorial jurisdiction the Panchayat area concerned or the major portion of the Panchayat area concerned is situate by any candidate at such election or by any voter qualified to vote at such election, this writ petition is not maintainable.

4. For the reasons stated above, the writ petition stands dismissed.

SD/-

JUDGE DL