High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri.Chandra Kumar Kolla Bhovi vs The State Of Karnataka By The Under … on 26 May, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Sri.Chandra Kumar Kolla Bhovi vs The State Of Karnataka By The Under … on 26 May, 2009
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy
Hi' THE 3263 COURT OF KARHATAKA, 

THE I-I ONBLE MR. JUSTICE 

nxran THIS THE 26% IJAY er    A-

BEFORE;  

WRIT PETITION No. lszgagg G15 201??   % 

BETWEEN

1

SRLCHANDRA K'L31V1AR K_Qjg;;A Bylaw _
S/O KGLLAPPA BHOVZ  j   .,
AGED AB(:;{:':f 46ri"EAi2s,  
PADM.A¥=*A'I"Hi'NIEAY;%   A '  V. 
SHESH.&DRIEL1RA§~§_   -- 

5;*§'1~IT'c:Ie~:-éss, €§VVIV'9Ii3}fA'§;?IO(}G:¥XVV'
PRESIDENTIEILLA'"I?fAI€CHAYATH,

SHIVAMO'GGA.}' .   ~  PE'I'¥'i'EONER.

(By Sci: K r#"?§§AvE'Er€'v.KU'§»4AR 5:, ASSOCIATES, Aims.)

" K   I  n H  ..... .. V

V OF KARNATAKA,
  B7*i'.'3fHE'L}Ni3ER SECRETARY
' DEPARTMENT 01$ RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND

 PANCHAYATHRAJ, VIBHANA SOGDHA

DR; AMBEDKAR VEEDI

 ..  BMGALGRE

(By Sm}; M13. NAGASHRE:E1,ADV.)

'THE CHIEF ELECTGRAL OFFICER 55

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
GOVERNMENT' OF KAHNATAKA
DPAMELECTIONS}

BAi\IGALORE  RESPONDENTS.

M

TRIS WRET PETITION iS F-‘ELED UNDER ARTiCL-E_$__226
AND 22′? OF THE CONSTITUTION OP’ INEZHA PR’AYiN§_C}’>TO
DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TC} ALLOW THE PET-i_T’IQ”NE3’R

TO CONTfN{§E HIS OFFICE TH.-L HE COMPLE”‘§’–E€~.___’?i’I~EE
mew 0;» OFFICE 01? PRESSENT i.e., TILL 5.1e;09,A:;;a_”?E:1’~e–.e ~

PROVISIONS OF PANCHEKYATFI RAJ AC? 1993,. ‘

THIS PETITION, COMING €)’N§*022 ‘«:J12e£)ié:;:e4:s%%,:’:*~I¥é£:e’ee,

SAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLQ’_W§*NG».; .
0 R 9_;____g;_g +. ”

The petitioner elected Eresident

of the Zilla Pa11cl1ayath..:”o1f1 has presented

this petition for 3. v;r;”i’t~. pf directing the

respoI;§€1e§itS petifieiler £0 continue in ofiice
until th e §:0:12p1eV1_;.i(:-§f1w.ef iierm, that is upto 5-10-2009

in t;e;r*m.s_ of Panchayath Raj Act, £993 (for

‘ 7 ‘ …..

” counsel fer the petitioner advances the

‘ . V fo1i0{vi.fig..t§a4o contentions:

n ‘T ~._(i) having been eiected to the post: of Adhyaksha
5 of the Ziila Fanchayath an 2€>~09~2007, the
peiitioner is entitled to coniinue in the said

post until expiry cf ’20 months therefrom as

cofztempiated by sub–~sectio:1 (3) of Section

N

1?’? (Sf the Karnataka Parzchayath Réij’

1993;

(ii) in the light of me ap§&iCat§0n7_¢’f ‘C;§§d4r”;i”~ofv-.A ”
Conduct from 2-4-2003 n:;T9,T8»G5+2;§es’ Jim;
period of 5′? days; the pétiti:3r1erT.is to L.

an extensitm of of ~20′ ::iozit}1SVupto
5-1:}-2009, ” V

3. Havi1f1g ‘ for the
petition$r’Tva:£:itif ‘.1e5i:1:n’ir:é$§;’-._é;1ib:s+3ciion (3) of Section 177
of the Eat; étheife’ fioubt that the petitioner is

enfitled tow? hgfild Adhyaksha for a period 0f 20

_; t’1″r:;_I:1 tA}i’c;-….rjgs.:;e of his aiection, that is 2é~09–

Iiéézéond cantention to extsnd the pezriad $0

fnas té (2€Z§§E§3£’VZ”§’? days whence the Code cf Cenduct was in

“f€)}:’§§:é:~,. in my Censiciered opinion, is but a spacious plea.

V” ‘F136 Legisiature having fixed the period of 12!} months as

‘4 £116: tam of Office Of the Adhyaksha in accordance with

sub~sc-mtion {3} of Section 17′?’ of the Act, the pstitioner

M

cannot E3.d’§?aI}Cf,’: a cantention that he is —-u’§:7:1t:r;{ie{:i’ ”

extfinsion of the said period by V53?” :3… ys– <t}1i1 é§;¢:c01i11tg.of.,

the appiicatien of the Cede of A' I

Writ petition is acc0rdin§13<":dispos;e':i

KS