G SRINIVAS Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CHITRADURGA; NARAYANAGONDAHALLI GRAM PANCHAYATH HOLALKERE TALUK; EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYATH HOLALKERE; R PUTTAPPA; NEELAMMA; RATHNAMMA; CHOWDAMMA; A GIRISH; K DINAKAR; GEETA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition for a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned notice dated 08.06.2018 bearing No.Election:CR:06/18-19 as per Annexure-C issued by the 1st respondent.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was elected as a member of the Gram Panchayath of Narayanagondanahalli in the year 2015. Subsequently, in the meeting held on 30.06.2015, the petitioner came to be elected as Adhyaksha of Narayanagondahalli Gram Panchayath. On 26.05.2018, the respondent Nos.4 to 15, members of the Gram Panchayath made a representation to the 1st respondent to move 'No-confidence Motion' against the petitioner. On 01.06.2018, 3rd respondent submitted a report to the 1st respondent. In turn, the 1st respondent issued notice on 08.06.2018 fixing the date on 27.06.2018 to move 'No-confidence Motion' against the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court for the relief sought for.

(3.) Sri.H.Devendrappa, learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that the notice issued by the Assistant Commissioner dated 08.06.2018 fixing the meeting on 27.06.2018 to move 'No-confidence Motion' against the petitioner is erroneous and contrary to material on record and liable to be quashed. He would further contend that when the respondent Nos.4 to 15, members of the Gram Panchayat, made a representation to move 'No-confidence Motion', the 1st respondent on the same day communicated the same to the Executive Officer to send the report. The Executive officer has to send the report within a week after conducting enquiry only by him in terms of Rule 3(2) of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Motion of No-confidence Against Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Gram Panchayat) Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as Rules for short). But in the present case, the Executive Officer has relied upon the report of the Assistant Director of Taluk Panchayat dated 31.05.2018 and submitted a report dated 01.06.2018, which is against the Government Circular dated 07.02.2018. Therefore, he sought to quash the impugned notice, as the same is defective. He would further contend that even from the date of the representation made by the members of the Gram Panchayat on 26.05.2018, the Assistant Commissioner fixed the date to move 'No confidence Motion' on 27.06.2018 (31 days) which is contrary to Rule 3(2) of the Rules. Therefore, he sought to allow the Writ Petition by quashing the impugned notice.