C S INDRAMMA Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MANDYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED Government Advocate to accept notice for respondents No.l and 2 and file memo of appearance in four weeks.

(2.) THE petitioner is before this Court claiming to be aggrieved by the notice dated 21.12.2012 (Annexure-B) whereby meeting for electing the Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha to Besagarahalli Gramapanchayat Maddur Taluk is convened and scheduled on 03.01.2013.

(3.) HAVING heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the meeting notice would not call for interference in a petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, when the date for the meeting has already been scheduled since it has been consistently held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that this Court will not interfere with the calendar of events, once the same has been notified by the authorities. Therefore, if at all the petitioner has any grievance, the same can only be assailed in an appropriate election petition in accordance with law and not in a petition as presently done. Therefore, I see no reason to interfere with the impugned notice dated 21.12.2012. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with liberty.