RAMACHANDRA Vs. STATE ELECTION COMMISSION BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners, who are now disqualified from holding the post of members of the Taluk Panchayat, Bangarpet, have filed these petitions challenging the order of the State Election Commission, dated 25-3-2000.

(2.) THE facts in these cases are as follows: the petitioners and others were elected as members of the Taluk panchayat, Bangarpet. The total number of members of the Taluk panchayat is 22. Out of 22, 14 persons were elected on Janata Dal ticket, 8 persons were elected on Congress ticket. The Returning Officer issued the calendar of events calling upon the members of the Taluk' panchayat to elect Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha in the meeting held on 17-12-1998.

(3.) THE case of the complainants before the Election Commission is that the Janata Dal, which is a national political party, called for the meeting of all the members elected on Janata Dal ticket to serve whip/direction. It is not in dispute that one Smt. Lalithamma has been nominated as a candidate for the post of Adhyaksha and one Sri M. Krishnappa has been nominated as a candidate for the post of Upadhyuksha by the political party. In this connection, as seen from the evidence, though the meeting of all the Janata Dal candidates was ealled for, the petitioners did not attend the said meeting. The further case of the complainants is that even though the petitioners were not present in the meeting called on 17-12-1998, the whip / direction sought to be served thereafter was refused by them. Ultimately, the election to the posts of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha was held and the persons belonging to Congress party were declared elected as Adhyaksha and upadhyaksha. This has made the complainants to file complaint before the State Election Commission to take appropriate action under the provisions of the Karnataka Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection)Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act' ). Before the State Election commission, the complainants have examined five witnesses, whereas the respondents, who are the petitioners in these petitions, have examined only one witness.