D NAGARAJU Vs. COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is before this Court assailing the order dated 01.06.2012 which is impugned at Annexure-A to the petition. Consequently, the petitioner has sought for dismissal of the petition filed by the second respondent before the first respondent as not sustainable.

(2.) THE petitioner is a resident of Uttuvalli village, Chamarajanagar Taluk and he was elected as a member of the Shivapura Grama Panchayat. The present proceedings which has been initiated against the petitioner is for remaining absent for four consecutive meetings of the Grama Panchayat held on 17.07.2010, 25.08.2010, 04.10.2010 and 19.11.2010. The consequence of the declaration in such circumstance is provided in Section 13(2) of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act ('the Act' for short). It is in that regard, the first respondent has held the proceedings and by the order dated 01.06.2012 has disqualified the petitioner from continuing as a member of the Grama Panchayat. It is against the said order, the petitioner is before this Court.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for respondent No.2 would seek to justify the order passed by the first respondent. It is pointed out that the allegation was that the petitioner remained absent for four consecutive meetings held by the Grama Panchayat. In that regard, though notices would be issued, the service would be by Muddam and acknowledgment would be obtained in a form. Insofar as the petitioner is concerned, the notice had been served either on the wife of the petitioner or the daughter. The wife who is also a member of the Grama panchayat has attended two out of the said four meetings. Therefore, the petitioner certainly had knowledge of the meeting and had remained absent. This in fact could be demonstrated from the documents at Annexure-F series i.e., the records for issuance of notice of the meeting and the records indicating absence in the meeting is also available. Hence, it is contended that the action taken against the petitioner is justified.