R KRISHNE GOWDA Vs. ASST COMMR KOLAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is by the former President of the Taluk Development Board, Malur in Kolar Dist. and has challenged the impugned order at Annexure-A to the petition.

(2.) The petitioner was elected to that office in the year 1978. The Asst. Commissioner, Kolar Sub-Division, by his order dt. 28.11.1981 directed that bye-election to the office of the President of the Taluk Development Board, Malur Tlq. should be held at 12 noon on 28.12.1981 at the prescribed timings providing for receipt of nominations, scrutiny of nominations, withdrawal of candidature, publication of list of validly nominated candidates, conduct of bye-election in the event of contest, and declaration of results after the bye-election .

(3.) Aggrieved by that order, the petitioner approached this Court, inter alia contending that the calendar of events or notice of bye-election was illegal, contrary to law and therefore should be quashed and pending decision of this Court, the elections should be stayed. The grounds in support of the prayers in addition to the one mentioned above was that there was no vacancy in the office; of the President at all and in any event if there was vacancy, that vacancy had been declared contrary to the express provisions contained in sub-sec. (3) of S. 103 of the Village Panchayats and Local Boards Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in as much as the Commissioner did not afford an opportunity to the petitioner of being heard before declaring the vacancy in the office of the President, on the alleged disqualification incurred by the petitioner by virtue of having been convicted by the District & Sessions Judge, Kolar, for having committed an offence punishable under S. 302 of IPC. He also alleged that the conviction had not become final and that the. High Court had allowed him on bail and an appeal was pending before the High Court against the conviction and sentence. This Court on 24.12.1981 issued emergent notice, but made it clear that the elaction was taking place subject to the result of the writ petition. On 29.3.1982 an order was passed regarding an inter-locutory application. On 15.11.1S82, this Court directed that IAs-I and II to be posted along with the main petition in, 'B' group on 22.11.1982. Since then it has been appearing in the list for hearing in 'B' group. After notice, IA-I was filed to implead one B.M. Krisnappa who had bejen elected! President pursuant to the notice or direction dt. 28.11.1981 as per Annexurer -A, i.e., the impugned calendar of elections. The proposed respondent has entered appearance through counsel and while passing this order, he has been heard. In that view of the matter, IA-I should be deemed to have been allowed and the person mentioned therein impleaded as respondent No. 3.