D M Chandrappa S/O Mudlagiriyappa vs The Assistant Commissioner on 28 August, 2009

IN THE men MANTHix:'9§A  ~
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS. '   g 

N. RANGAPPA s/0 NAGAPPAX 
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS_.'~--. =

RESPONDENTS 3 TO 6 A§E.i  _  :

RESIDENTS OF KAREHALLE, Mumonu ‘How,
HOSADU RGA TALUK,_ R c;A oxsmzcr.

MALLAIAQ-{S/0 Mu9LAPPA V
AGED Asap? 32;YRs,jryo *M.EmAsmAHALu
HosA9s.;a<f;A _TA1.'£3K,_
cHmzAr;«zm<;:; msmz%c_"r._

Sm' 'sx?f€2AM'iii3A W/<5 JA'h§?'PA
AGED AB"Ci£?T'31':'R$,_R,'0 AJJI KAMSAGARA

H'€)SADURGA'j_"§'"A't;!4kZ,.4
CHITFRADUPLSAA ms'-_';RzcT.

HQsAi3«;JRGA TALU K,
sMT%*:%.£%A;:§AMMA W/0 CHANDRAPPA

CHITRADURGA DISTRICT’

R/0 AAGALAKEREMOSADURGA TALUK
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.

RESPOHDENTS 10 8: 11 ARE
RESIDENTS OF AAGALAKERE, HOSADURGA

TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.

,xeeemm

(By M/S. ANN ASSOCIATES FOR ai41VAT:§TeT’ ‘, 1
SMT.M.C.NAGASi-FREE ASA :=r.V:’ver;=re§§’rr:§AT§§’ery hearing this
day, the Ccur1:_”me;c1.-e theAfo§lAAc}pnsti_tutioiij;s Wm is *

discretionary. She made submEstsion:fs’si.rfi tisueptertg”t§f-,,_§i’se_*é

action taken by the first respé_nd_e-nttensit soughvtA..ii?,1vh9l¢iiinvg

of An nexure-A.

7. Learned it respondent
caveator contenéiee. -ii6t°i’sf;eVVvjetvjstnnexure-B was
submitted elected members
who are?’ signatures were aiso
attestesi’-_A ef the Panchayat. {first

respondentkfltheVstatuteifauthority, based on the request

.__mac:i__’e§’«:.iri__iiE!\:aVifiexti’r’e»-v3…ia\:vi2ich cenforms to Form I under the

Réi’Ies,_the~iiVetibe_ under Ruie 3 (2) i.e., Form II was issued

wins fi.sst.V–Vtes;>endent on 11.08.09 and by the said action,

‘,_no iii-egaixfityi has been committed. Learned courisei placed

“..fjreii’e’n.g:eNon a decision in the case of MUMIRATHNAMMA

E»:

8. In View of the rival contentions, the”;3o.l.’t;t:

consideration is, whether interferenee with-fixeojexure-A is ”= 2

called for?

9. Petitioner is an Velegtedillegiinyaksnarl gm if»,

elected unanimously on stipport of
respondents 3 to 11 Not the Act
contains the AV_pro\:is§Vonf’,_ i-alnerei’n;”‘5..’:v§.dhyaksha or

Upadhyaksha s__’o4f::a:i1″Verame “F5an’cnVa§%at——asnall be forthwith

oeemedto =h.:ai*+,!e office, if a resolution
expressiegl’ wantiloiff’:_eooinfi§i*enoe in him / her is passed, by

majority of;hot”less«.tlien”tl51o-thirds of the members of the

Eernothayat’ ‘at——–a”meeting specially convened for the

L_peVrposev…i_ni lvacioordance with the procedure as prescribed.

S..495″Aof grew right to the members to have

7._Adhy’as§r.sl3e or Upedhyaksha removed if not less than two«

V’ ‘V~IlftnVitd’s«’rof the members express their lack of confidence in

tne Adhyaksha or Upadhyaksha as the case may be. The

‘V V Horocedure can be traced to Rule 3 of the Rules. The said

Rule has to be read along with 5.49. A combined reading

\

‘xi

-‘W./.23c;’ithe.tA,:aforeseiddecision of MALLAMMA when cited for

Leofisideraltioefi;oiafter noticing the same, it has been heid as

‘T the context of the section and not

10

of the said provisions shows that, the right is
members of the Panchayat to rer_no.ve_ the ”
Upacihyaksha as the case may be a:j”¢’:i~
Adhyaksha or Upadhyaksha’V_iio._ hoi£i*- tithe
compietion of the Ifierioci. A hi it it

10. The decisioii’the_£§–hiih’fe.f§hfa*d_esh High Court
in the case of Gg¢im_iA (supra) is

in para matefiethe: j;oA’t’?~_+uERS, reported in zoos (1) Kar.£..3.