R CHIKKARUDRAPPA Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was elected as the Councillor of the Town Municipal Council, Vijayapura town, in the election held on 4-5-2001. The Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore Rural District, the first respondent herein, by his order bearing No. MUN (1) CR/108/ 2001-02 dated 30-9-2004, marked as Annexure-K, disqualified the petitioner from being the Councillor of the Town municipal Council, Vijayapura, on the ground that the petitioner was convicted in C. C. No. 29 of 1977 as Accused No. 7 for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 489-A and 489-D of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of three years, as per the judgment dated 24-7-1978 of the Sessions Court, Bangalore. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the above order of the first respondent, preferred an appeal to the Directorate of municipal Administration, Government of Karnataka, the second respondent. The second respondent, by his order dated 3-1-2005, marked as Annexure-M, dismissed the appeal. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the orders at Annexures-K and M, has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) IT was contended by the Learned Counsel for the petitioner that though the Sessions Court, bangalore, sentenced the petitioner to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of three years as per its judgment dated 24-7-1978, ultimately, in Civil Appeal No. 85 of 1980 preferred to the hon'ble Supreme Court of India, the Supreme Court, by its judgment and order dated 30-8-1995, has reduced the sentence to 11/2 years and, therefore, as on the date of election of the petitioner as Councillor of the Council on 4-5-2001, the petitioner did not suffer disqualification prescribed in Clause (a) of Sub-section (1) of Section 16 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 (for short 'the Act'), if the same is read with proviso (c) to Sub-section (1) of Section 16 of the Act.

(3.) SRI Deshraj, Learned Government Advocate, per contra, would point out that though the Apex court, by its judgment and order dated 30-8-1995, reduced the sentence to IV years, the sentence could be executed only on 20-8-2001 and if that date is taken as the relevant date, as on the date of the election of the petitioner as Councillor on 4-5-2001, the four years period did not expire and, therefore, the action of the first respondent Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore Rural District, as affirmed by the Director of the Directorate of Municipal Administration, is justified and legal.