UDAYA PATALI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 12.4.2016 passed by the respondent No.1 vide Annexure-A.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that one Sri.Abdul Azeez had filed a representation dated 22.2.2011 to the Village Panchayat for shifting the Autorickshaw stand from Pariladaka to some other place. Since, his representation was not considered, he approached this Court by filing W.P.No.14737/2011. This Court by order dated 30.10.2012 has directed the Grama Panchayat to consider the representation of the said Abdul Azeez and to pass appropriate orders within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of the said order. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the Panchayat vide Annexure-D has passed a resolution and rejected the request of the said Abdul Azeez. Inspite of that, he has filed a contempt petition before this Court in CCC No.408/2013. The Division Bench of this Court by order dated 24.6.2013 has dismissed the contempt petition reserving liberty to the complainant therein to challenge the resolution, if he chooses to do so. Without challenging the resolution, the complainant has given complaint against the petitioner herein to the Lokayuktha. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Lokayuktha, Mangalore has sent a report dated 30.10.2013 vide Annexure-G to the Additional Director General of Police, Lokayuktha, Bangalore stating that the directions passed by this Court has not been complied. Pursuant to the same, the Lokayuktha has sent a letter to the Government on 8.5.2014 requesting to take action against the petitioner. Pursuant to that, proceedings has been initiated against the petitioner under Section 43A of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (for short "the Act"?) and passed the impugned order dated 12.4.2016 vide Annexure-A removing the petitioner from the post of the Member of the Grama Panchayat. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the directions issued by this Court dated 30.10.2012 vide Annexure-B, the Panchayat has considered the representation of the said Abdul Azeez and rejected his request. In the contempt petition filed by the said Abdul Azeez, the Division Bench of this Court by order dated 24.6.2013 vide Annexure-E has dismissed the contempt petition reserving liberty to the complainant to challenge the resolution before the Panchayat. Inspite of that, he has given complaint to the Lokayuktha, Mangalore against the petitioner. The Lokayuktha without conducting any enquiry has sent the report to the Government vide letter dated 8.5.2014. Consequently, the respondent No.1 without following the due procedure of law under Section 43A of the Act, without considering the decision of this Court passed in the earlier orders vide Annexures-B and E and resolution passed by the Panchayat vide Annexure-D has passed the impugned order to remove the petitioner from being member of the Grama Panchayat. Hence, he sought for allowing the petition.