SHANTHA NAIK Vs. RAJEEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) in this writ petition, Petitioner has challenged the order dated 30/10/2010 passed by the Prl. Civil Judge & J.M.F.C., Mangalore, in Election Petition No. 1/2010, which is produced at Annexure 'A' and he has also challenged the order dated 5/5/2010 passed by the Tahsildar - Respondent No. 3, which is produced at Annexure 'E'.

(2.) According to the Petitioner, she is a member of the Bhovi community, a Scheduled Caste, by birth and was married to Sri Narayan Naik, a member of Scheduled Tribe on 7/3/1993 at Kateel as per the customary rights of the community; that she has been recognized as a member of her husband's caste and accepted by the public as a member of the Naik community. She filed her nomination as a candidate of Ward No. 2 of Mogaru village, which is reserved for Scheduled Tribe women, on 23/4/2010, to be elected a member of Ganjimutt Gram Panchayat. At the time of filing her nomination, she had attached a Caste Certificate issued by the Tahsildar, certifying that she belonged to Scheduled Tribe. On scrutiny, the same was accepted and she contested for the said election as per Section 17 of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Conduct of Elections) Rules, 1993 (hereinafter, referred to as the 'Rules'). The election was conducted on 12/5/2010 and the Petitioner was declared elected on 15/5/2010. The said election was challenged by Respondent No. 1 initially, seeking rejection of the nomination on the basis that she did not belong to the Schedule Tribe and thereafter, the election petition was filed before the Prl. Civil Judge, Mangalore, in Election Petition No. 1/2010 under Section 19 of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (hereinafter, referred to as the Act'), by contending that as on the date of the election, the returned candidate was not qualified or in other words, was disqualified. The said ground raised in the Election Petition was under Section 19(1)(a) of the Act. The Election Petition was posted for trial. During the course of trial, the first Respondent examined herself as P.W. 1. and produced 10 documents, which were marked as Exs. P. 1 to P. 10 while the Petitioner herein examined herself as R.W. 1 and another witness was examined as R.W2. On the basis of the said evidence, the Trial Court held that first Respondent herein had made out a case under Section 19 and 20 of the Act and while allowing the election petition, declared that the Petitioner herein was disqualified to act as member of Ward No. 2 of Mogaru village, Ganjimutt Grama Panchayat, Mangalore. It was also declared that Respondent No. 1 was duly elected and consequently, directions were Issued that the first Respondent was to act as the member of Ward No. 2. The said order has been challenged in this writ petition.

(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel Sri. Taranath Poojary for Petitioner, learned Counsel Ms. Jayana Kothari for Respondent No. 1 and the learned G.P. for Respondents 2 and 3.