THYAVANIGE VILLAGE PANCHAYAT Vs. DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DIVISION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A division Bench of the court has referred to this Full Bench the following two questions of law:

(2.) The reference of the first of these two questions was necessitated by the conflict between decisions of two Division Benches of this Court. In K. Venkategowda v. State of Mysore, (1963) 1 Mys LJ 150 the Bench consisting of Somnath Iyer and Mr. Iqbal Hussain, JJ., held that the notification impugned in that case, made under Section 3(2) of the Mysore Village Panchayats and Local Boards Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), could not be sustained as it was not made after consultation with the Taluk Board. In Town Panchayat Committee, Konnur v. State of Mysore, (1966) 1 Mys LJ 444 another Bench consisting of Tukol and Bhimmiah, JJ. held that consultation with the Taluk Board under Section 3(2) of the Act is not mandatory and failure or absence of such consultation, does not invalidate such Notification. The earlier Bench decision does not appear to have been brought to the notice of the later Bench which has taken a contrary view.

(3.) It is convenient to set out the relevancy provisions of the Act and of the Mysore Village Panchayats Declaration of Villages (Procedure) Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). These Rules were made by the Government in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 210 read with Section 3 of the Act.