M N VIRUPAKSHAIAH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) learned counsel for the petitioner contends that, from out of the total of 11 seats for membership to the Bevinahalli Gram Panchayat, 6 seats reserved for women represents excess of 60% of total number of seats, contrary to the mandate of the Constitution and the proviso to Section 5(3) of Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (for short 'Act'), in my opinion, cannot be countenanced.

(2.) I may so because Article 243-D of the Constitution of India provides for reservation of seats. Sub-article (2) provides reservation for women of not less than l/3rd of the total number of seats reserved for SC and ST women while sub-article (3) provides reservation for women of not less than l/3rd of the total number of seats filled by direct election in every Panchayat. Sub-article 6 invests a jurisdiction in the State Legislature to make provision for reservation of seats in any Panchayat in favour of backward class of citizens.

(3.) Sub-section (3) of Section 5 of the Act provides for reservation of 1/3rd of the total number of seats of the Gram Panchayat for persons belonging to the backward clasess, while the proviso states that from out of seats for backward classes, 80% of the total number of such seats would be reserved to persons falling under the category "A" and the remaining 20% for persons falling under category "B".