CHANNIGAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is filed by way of public interest challenging the constitutional validity of Section 124 (c) and Section 163 of the Karnataka panchayat Raj Act, 1993 as amended by Act 8 of 2000 and for a mandamus to State Election Commission not to accept the lists sent by the government and Deputy Commissioners of the State or notifications issued by the Government and Deputy Commissioners of the State identifying the reservation of Constituencies to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled tribes, Backward Classes and for Women to Taluka Panchayats and to zilla Panchayats in the State of Karnataka and not to hold elections to taluka Panchayats and to Zilla Panchayats as per notifications issued by the Government and the Deputy Commissioners of the State dated 22-4-2000, 20-4-2000, 17-4-2000, 24-4-2000, 26-4-2000 and 28-4-2000 as per Annexures-B, G, E and F. Petitioners have also sought for a direction to constitute a Commission or Committee consisting of retired judges of High Court and Director of Backward Classes and Minorities, director of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and the local MLAs of the District to assist the State Government in the matter.

(2.) A detailed affidavit is also filed in support of the same. It is stated in the petition that the first petitioner is an elected Member of the karnataka Legislative Assembly from Koratagere Constituency, tumkur District. Petitioner 2 is an Ex-President of the Hassan Zilla panchayat. They say that they are concerned with the democratic method of elections in the matter of Panchayats both Taluka and Zilla. They are concerned about the exercise of State power while taking steps regarding delimitation and reservation of Constituencies. They are concerned about free and fair elections to these basic institutions. According to them the State Election Commission is an independent Commission entrusted with constitutional authority and power and that authority cannot be denied any power in the matter of conduct of elections to taluka and Zilla Panchayats. It is their case that the Amendment Act 8 of 2000 is unconstitutional, invalid and illegal due to the reason that the power vested with the Election Commission is taken away by the Government contrary to Article 243. By virtue of the amendment the power now has been entrusted to the Deputy Commissioner/government which cannot be done in terms of the constitutional mandate according to the petitioners.

(3.) PETITIONERS further complain denial of an opportunity to the voters of the Constituency to make representations to the Deputy Commissioner /government while issuing the impugned notification changing the territory under the Act.