TUKKANASA Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DHARWAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The subject-matter of this writ petition is an inter-party quarrel which in ordinary course should not have been brought up in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. But nonetheless the controversy having arisen, I am to record my views thereon.

(2.) Albeit the arguments on both sides at the Bar having procceded on a wider basis, what really clinches the issue is that which touches the question of competence or the jurisdiction of the Deputy Commissioner, the designated authority in whom is confided the power to decide apropos the disqualification of a member or a councillor on grounds of defection.

(3.) This case has an interesting background. The petitioner Rayabagi and one Mr. Ashok Bagamar who is a non-party to this writ petition filed their nominations for the presidential election. Both of them were elected to the Municipal Council of Gajendragad town in Dharwad District under the banner of the Janata Dal. After the elections were held to constitute the Municipal Council and were concluded on 24-4-1990, one amongst them had to be elected as President of the Municipal Council under the statute and for that purpose an election was scheduled to be held on 29-5-1990. On that day, both Rayabagi and the petitioner and Ashok Bagmar the non-party, threw themselves into the fray, offered themselves as candidates at that election. Admittedly, both of them having been elected under the banner of the Janata Dal,both of them had necessarily been treated as candidates of the Janata Dal, but locked however in contesting each other. But it is claimed that Ashok Bagmar was actually the official candidate of the party for contesting the office of the presidentship and to that effect a whip had also been issued to all the members of the Janata Dal in the Council.