NINGAPPA BASAPPA HULLURA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these petitions, the constitutional validity of Rule 2 of the Rules framed under the Karnataka Zilla Parishads, Taluk Panchayat Samithis, Mandal Panchayats and Nyaya Panchayats Act, 1983 (in short the Mandal Panchayats Act) is challenged by the petitioners who are the members of certain Mandal Panchayats having been elected to the respective Mandal Panchayats in the 1987 elections held under the Mandal Panchayats Act.

(2.) In one of the petitions, the validity of Section 2(2) of the Mandal Panchayats Act is also challenged on the ground that the same confers an arbitrary power on the Government to define what Back-ward Class is. These petitions were followed by a number of petitions by the elected members of the Zilla Parishads and Mandal Panchayats questioning the right of Adhyaksha to nominate two persons of his choice from the Backward Class in the event no members from that Class are elected in the Mandal Panchayat elections under Section 5(3) of the Mandal Panchayats Act. Though that question is also before this Court in these petitions it is not necessary to go into these questions since those questions are set at rest by the earlier decision of this Court in Ningappa Ramachandra Gurav v. State of Karnataka (I L.R. 1988 Kar. 1348) which was affirmed in Writ Appeal No. 1942 of 1987 disposed of on 30-3-1988 and reported in State of Karnataka v. Ningappa Ramachandra Gurav (1988(1) Kar L.J. 466 (DB) : I.L.R. 1988 Kar. 1380).

(3.) I will take up the case of the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 8888 of 1987 since the State Government has filed its return in that petition. I will also refer to the facts in Writ Petition No. 4545 of 1987 since in that case also the State Government has filed the return disputing the contentions of the petitioners therein.