K NARAYANA REDDY Vs. SHAHEED SHAHAZADHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant.

(2.) The appellant has impugned the judgment and order dated 17th January 2019 passed by the learned Single Judge. The appellant, the first respondent and two others contested the election to the membership of Kolar Zilla Panchayath held in accordance with the provisions of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (for short 'the said Act of 1993'). The result of the election was declared on 23rd February 2016 and the first respondent was duly declared as elected. On 21st March 2016, the appellant filed an election petition before the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, KGF, by invoking sub-section (1) of Section 15 of the said Act of 1993. On 22nd July 2016, the first respondent made an application before the learned Judge by contending that the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge had no jurisdiction in view of the amendment made to sub-section (1) of Section 15 of the said Act of 1993 by the Act No.44 of 2015 which was brought into force with effect from 25th February 2016. On 18th August 2016, an order was made by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge returning the election petition to the appellant for presentation to the Designated Court having jurisdiction.

(3.) By the Act No.44 of 2015, sub-section (1) of Section 15 was amended. The amendment was that the forum for filing the election petition was provided as the Designated Court in place of the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division). After taking back the petition on 19th August 2016, the appellant presented the same before the Designated Court on 23rd August 2019. The appellant invoked Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (for short 'the Limitation Act') for getting over the prescribed period of limitation. By an order dated 20th February 2017, the Designated Court granted the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act to the appellant and excluded the time spent in the wrong Court from 21st March 2016 till 19th August 2016. Being aggrieved by the said order, the first respondent filed a writ petition which has been allowed by the learned Single Judge on the ground that Section 14 of the Limitation Act is not applicable to the election petition under sub-section (1) of Section 15 of the said Act of 1993.