YASHODAMMA G Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE common question of law is involved in these two Writ petitions, these Writ Petitions are disposed of by a common order.

(2.) THE facts in these two cases are as follows:the petitioner in W. P. No. 4728/2003 is the elected President of the third respondent - Kadur Municipal Council. Seventeen councillors to the Kadur Municipal Council submitted a representation to the President on 9. 1. 2003 to call for the meeting to consider the motion of no confidence moved against the petitioner. On the basis of this representation the Chief Officer called a special general meeting on 30. 1. 2003 by notice dated 21. 1. 2003. Accordingly, the special meeting was held on 30. 1. 2003. 28 councillors attended the said meeting. Out of 28, 17 councillors voted in favour of the motion whereas, 7 councillors voted against the motion. On the basis of the said resolution the official memorandum dated 5. 2. 2003 was issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Chickmagalur District, Chickmagalur, stating that the motion has been carried by 2/3rds majority and accordingly, declared the post of President as vacant. This has been called in question by the petitioner in this Writ Petition.

(3.) THE total number of members of the Kadur Municipal Councilconsists of 30. Out of 30, 23 are elected, 5 nominated and one MLA and one MP. The contention of the petitioner in this Writ Petition is that out of the total number of members of the Municipal Council, the persons voted in favour of the motion are only 17 and as 17 councillors do not represent 2/3rds of the total number of members of the municipal council present in the meeting, the notification issued by the Deputy Commissioner as per Annexure-G is illegal.