SIDDALINGAPPA HANUMAPPA MARAMBID Vs. ELECTION OFFICER GANJIGATTI GROUP GRAM PANCHAYAT
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
SIDDALINGAPPA HANUMAPPA MARAMBID
ELECTION OFFICER, GANJIGATTI GROUP GRAM PANCHAYAT
Referred Judgements :-
BASETTAPPA V. K.C.CHENNIAH
Click here to view full judgement.
TUKOL, J. -
(1.)The petitioner who is a sitting Chairman of the Gangigatti Group
Panchayat has filed this writ petition for a writ of certiorari to quash the
proceedings of the village panchayat dated 16-12-1968. In the meeting held
on December 16, 1968, the proceedings of which are sought to be quashed,
respondents 2 and 3 were elected as Chairman and Vice-Chairman
(2.)The case of the petitioner is that after the election to the village panchayat
had taken place in the month of February, 1968, and the results of
the election of 13 members were declared in March, 1968, six members of
the village panchayat resigned from office on October 16, 1968. Under S.26
of the Mysore Village Panchayats and Local Boards Act, 1959 (hereinafter
called the Act), the resignations became effective on the expiry of 15 clear
days from the date of resignation. According to the petitioner, after six
members had resigned there were no elections held to fill up those vacancies
and that there existed after such resignation no legally constituted
village panchayat. Further it is his case that the meeting held on December 10, 1968,
was not a valid meeting as in fact there was no validly constituted village panchayat on
that day and that it was not within the competence of the remaining seven
members to elect a Chairman or Vice-Chairman in the meeting held on that day.
(3.)In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.2, it has been stated
that 13 members of the village panchayat were duly elected at the election
held in February 1968 and that the duly elected members who constituted
the panchayat commenced their term of office from 25-5-1968 in view of
the notification issued by the State Government under S.3(a) of the
Mysore Local Authorities (Postponement of Election and Continuance of
Administrator) (Repealing) Act, 1967 (hereinafter called Repealing Act) .
According to this respondent the steps have yet to be taken under S.35
of the Act to fill up vacancies caused by resignation and that the resignation of
the six members did not affect the validity of the election held on
December 16, 1968. It is also mentioned that the present writ petition is
malafide as it is intended to obstruct the smooth functioning of the committee.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.