H P Nagaraj vs Komalapura Gramapanchayath on 13 December, 2010

 ~-may SR: B.:J.sOMAYAJI, ADV, FOR R1 TO R3)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 13"' DAY OF DECEMBER, 
BEFORE 'E' K

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.II»EvN.uGOI5Ai;A--:GOVTDA 

vvRIT'RETITn3NIvO.365S1/2OIi}(S»TRI:IE7"-3"'

BETWEEN:

HRNAGARA3

S/O PUTTACHAR,  r

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,   ._ I

RESIDING AT i<.HARALAHALL;I, I

RAVANDUR HOBLL.  '

PIRIYAPATNA TA.I--.uI<E'CuTI.v.Ev"OEEICE
"  RIRI'=ATNA
.M"I<$O'RE DISTRICT.
 CHIEF EXECUTEVE OFFICER
_ f;zILLA RANCI»-IAYATH
" MYSORE.

 RESPONDENTS



Eu

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYINGQTO
QUASH THE IMPUGNED RESOLUTION DATED 12.8.2C'iQ."\/IEDE

ANNEXUREMA PASSED BY THE 15' RESPONDENT i<O.I_r;A.LA'Pa.I~RA..
GRAMA PANCHAYATH AND THE ENDORSEMENT ISS=;.__IED" ' I.
3*" RESPONDENT CHIEE EXECUTIVE OFFICER DATED 8;:-.1.'2D1o_j 
VIDE ANNEXUREMB AND THE NOTICE MEMO DATEiD_jj:.5.:-1.2019 
VIDE ANNEXUREHL ISSUED BY THE if-T"RE'3«POE'Ii.DE_.i\|T'IN SO'-F'ARg

AS wITH REGARD TO THE APPOINTiaiENT_.OjT EsEILL_cOLL_Er;TOR

AT SL.NO.6 IN THE NOTICE MEMO.

THTS PETITION cOMING'O_N'*~EOR PRELIMINAR'itf'H~EARING " I

IN '[3' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COU'RT_"MADE THE i-"Oi.LO%.{vING:-
.   RDEIRP  I j' 2 V I' - ._
Heard the Vlearned 'Sides, perused

the writ petitionDiapers"-anéj 'thetstatenient of objections.

2? rrrr  .I:'i3'fi%titi*0TIe_r,I"a~-~i§ii| Collector in 15'
responcient,/'i<Onda!:a"ptIra44EI"=£§r'a_Tn.apanchayath, was issued

with a sn'ow__'cao's.eV'i:ioti§e dated 17.07.2010. The 15"

F€Sp'GI!jld:€:r'ntx paSS'ed.. ____ __a resolution dated 12.08.2010 to

 ;"erTi<ure--L) issued by the

  13' respondent has given effect to the

comurnun.ica2tEi,--oh of the 2"" respondent dated 25.10.2010, as

His evident from the report dated 28.10.2010 (Ahnexure-~K)

,,.."_;=.uhi'rijitted to the 2"" respondent. 'kg

of'



4. The endorsement dated 08.11.2010 as at

Annexure-B issued to the petitioner by the 3" respofidye-nvt

is in violation of provision under sub--section (4-)§._ofi'S-ectioh,' 1-

113 of Karnataka Panchayath Raj _A..Ct,__(for_-'sh'o'r--t'_';v't'he  1"

1993. The said provision provides fo_jrrai'n  

the order passed by Secretary underas-uh~sectip'n~».i.(2V).toithe 

Executive Officer and as  orderV._AApVafssed by
Grama Panchayath  to the Chief
Executive Officer.» vThe:.a--ct:io:n 111" respondent
against  _J.uride'i:fgub-section (3) of
Section   is not justified in
as" at Annex-B. The 3"

responden'tiy_'oiughVt'  considered the appeai of the

 Detiti_onVer~ in eV$<e--r.cise of the power conferred under sub-

 section  --Qf"'Section 113 of the Act. In not doing so and

i"ii_iVs:_5uingrt_he 'en'dorsemeht as at Annexure-B, he has faiied

V . to eiéercise the power vested in him. Hence, the impugned

,1,_"----q.g,enderseVnfient is Iiabie to be quashed. It is for the 3"'

.'re.sp'oindent to decide in the appeai, the validity or

'otherwise of the resolution of the 1" respondent dated

3',-

Jo-



12.08.2010 (Annexure--A) and atso the notice dated

15.11.2010 (Annexure~L).

In the resuit, the writ petition stands  V'

endorsement issued by the V3"»..resp4'ong1e'nVtxt}a.t8d'. 

08.11.2010 as at Annexure--B stan<:.I"'s.Vqi;.!A_ashec00i';--     

The 3"" respondent' '-i.;s"~~._%»dire'cteci  V"'~-..e6r'Is"ijder 0' 2

expeditiousiy the apgaeat of  :..gj;et'iVti»Qner Ahitnvv-aceordance
with Iaw. 2

The petiti4c):he_r  1]'_S«E.Tv"~.li€SV£)Cg0d'e1'3C to appear
before 1.3"V.01.2011 at 3:00 pm and

receive further   

 Z  - Sdf:
 .....  

K:é;’,<__{%