STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. NINGAPPA RAMACHANDRA GURAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment of ours would dispose of writ Appeal Nos. 1942, 1943, 2184, 2250, 2251, 2253, 2309 & 2565/1987, as a common question of law and fact arises in all these cases :

(2.) The principal question of law that needs decision in these cases is whether an Adhyaksha having been properly authorised through a resolution by the Zilla Parishad, can validly nominate two persons from the Backward Classes under Section 5(3) of the Karnataka Zilla Pari- shads, Taluk Panchayat Samithis, Mandal Panchayats and Nyaya Panchayats Act, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(3.) So far as the facts are concerned, there is no dispute. What the Zilla Pari- shads have done in all these cases is that they have authorised their respective Adhyaksha (President) by resolution properly passed to nominate two persons from the Backward Classes and in pursuance to that resolution, the Adhyaksha has made such nominations. Through all these petitions, the nominations made by the Adhyaksha have been challenged on the ground that the power of nomination could not be delegated by the Zilla Parishad to the Adhyaksha, that even the Zilla Parishad cannot authorise the Adhyaksha to make nomination of the members from the Backward Classes and that it is the Zilla Parishad which is to make nominations under the Act. On the other hend, the plea put forth on behalf of the State is that an administrative power vested in a body of persons can for effective exercise of such power be exercised by one or some of them acting on behalf of all, that such exercise of power does not result in self-abnegation or delegation of power, that under the scheme of the Act, it is not necessary that nomination should be made by the entire Zilla Parishad and that an authorisation by the Zilla Parishad does not amount to delegation of power as understood under the Act and having been validly made in favour of the Adhyaksha by the Zilla Parishad, the nominations made by the Adhyaksha are valid.