JAGADEVI Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is challenging the notice dated 11. 06. 2007 issued by the Tahsildar and the Prescribed Officer for conducting the election to the post of Adhyaksha of the Grama Panchayat, jewargi, fixing the date of election of the Adhyaksha of the Grama panchayat on 19. 06. 2007 at 12 noon.

(2.) PETITIONER claims to be the Upadhyaksha of the Grama panchayat. The challenge to the impugned notice is mainly on the ground that only two months are left for the completion of the term of the Adhyaksha and therefore no useful purpose would be served by holding fresh election for such a short duration incurring substantial expenditure. He has further contended that as per section 53 of the Karnataka Panchayatraj Act, 1993, seven days clear notice of the meeting to elect the Adhyaksha has not been given to the petitioner. The petitioner asserts that the notice was served only on 15. 06. 2007 which would fall short of the requisite seven days notice as prescribed under the statute.

(3.) HAVING heard the Learned Counsel for the petitioner and the Learned Government Pleader Sri H. M. Manjunath who takes notice for respondents 1 and 2, it is seen that both the contentions of the petitioner are misconceived and untenable. The fact that only two months are left for the completion of the term of the president is no ground to set aside the notice issued to fix the date or election of the Adhyaksha of the Gram Panchayat. It is not in dispute that the post of Adhyakasha of the Grama Panchayat has become vacant and therefore the authorities are justified in taking action to fill up the vacant post irrespective of the duration of the remaining term of the Adhyaksha. As regards the second contention urged by the petitioner relying on Section 52 (3) of the Karnalaka Panchayatraj Act. 1993. it is noticed that the requirement of issue of seen days notice under the said provision pertains to a ordinary and special meeting pertaining to the business to be transacted and the notice required to he given there is by the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat to the members and such officers of the Government as may be prescribed about such meeting. The impugned meeting notice, in the instant case, is not in relation to any business to be transacted but a notice issued invoking Rule 4 of the Karnataka Panchayatraj (Election of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha) Rules, 1995. This is evident from the impugned notice Annexure-C itself. Therefore, the said ground urged by the petitioner is also not tenable in law. Hence, the writ petition being devoid of merits is dismissed.