High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Radha vs State Of Karnataka on 23 August, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Smt Radha vs State Of Karnataka on 23 August, 2010
Author: Ashok B.Hinchigeri


FAR AS RESERVATION MADE TO THE POST OF ADHYAKSHA AND
UPADHYAKSHA IN THE BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT ANEKAL TOWN
MUNICIPAL COUNCIL ARE CONCERN ED, AS THE NOTIFICATION ULTRA

VIRSE THE RULE 13 AND 13A OF THE KARNATKA MUNICIPALI’T,I’ETS’..u
(PRESIDENT AND VICE-PRESIDENT) ELECTION RULES 1965″‘AND.___ITE3;__
SUBSEQUIT AMENDMENT KARNATAKA MUNICIPALITIES (P’R’ESIDE;N”TSb””-I ‘

ETC .

AND VICE PRESIDENT) ELECTION (AMENDMENT RuLEs_’2Qo7)f~A_No-«

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR7PR|.if._”HfI3. THAIS jo.c\YjT.HE:1,E_I

COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING! ,.

ggoakfa
Sri E.S.Indiresh, the .i’eaArnedI””‘Hi§ih’Court Efioveérnment

Pleader is directed to take notice for the rCes.oEo–nt1e’r:_t No.1.

2. Sri the petitioner
submits that isL::ioNrer the reservation of
the office of Town Municipai Councit for
the BCB(W) .cateE;oryL. that for the last 5 terms
Sqw) categon,r has V’i’I..Q_tfiOOt’v:3EIfIz’OIJDOFIUTIIEY to occupy the office

inWques’ti.on._”‘.EIThé«–..VEearned counsel also compiains of non-

adherRénce._Vto””t1*;e__ as set out in guideiine No.11 of the

V7-IV3overnme’nt (Zr.I:*deI’:’;’ dated 23.01.2008.

K.M.!\Eataraj, the learned Addl. Advocate General

A Lessaam that for the first time the office is earmarked for 8CB(W)

fl_A”‘category. He submits that the office in the second term is

HBH.