SUBHASH TUKARAM SANGAONKAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN all these writ petitions the resolution dated 14-5-1997, removing the president and the vice-president of the city municipal council, nippani by passing a no confidence motion has been challenged.

(2.) THE total strength of the city municipal council, nippani, is 36. The petitioners in writ petition nos. 16533 and 16738 of 1997, were elected as president and vice-president respectively on 13-2-1996. Thereafter 26 councillors delivered the notice of intention to move the resolution as against the president and the vice-president to the personal assistant of the president on 2-5-1997. The said notice was placed before president on 3-5-1997 to take appropriate steps. This fact is disputed by the president stating that it was placed before her on 5-5-1997 and not on 3-5-1997. It is seen that the president on 5-5-1997 asked the commissioner to call for the meeting fixing the date of meeting as 14-5-1997 to consider the motion of no confidence. Accordingly, the meeting was called fixing the date of meeting as 14-5-1997. In the said meeting a resolution was passed by 2/3rd majority removing the president and the vice-president from their posts of president and vice-president respectively. The said resolution was challenged by way of preferring a revision petition before the divisional commissioner under Section 322 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act' ). The divisional commissioner dismissed the petition holding that there is no illegality in passing the resolution of no confidence motion. Therefore, the petitioners before the divisional commissioner are before this court.

(3.) ONE councillor who has not challenged the resolution by way of revision petition before the divisional commissioner has filed writ petition No. 13886 of 1997 directly challenging the resolution. Since in all these petitions the question involved is common, all these petitions were heard together.