ABDUL GAFOOR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the first respondent, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the second respondent and also the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent.

(2.) The third respondent-Corporation has been constituted under the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 (for short 'Act'). The provisions of the said Act have been amended to bring the same in conformity with the provisions of part IXA of the Constitution of India incorporated by 74th Constitutional amendment. The third respondent-Corporation is constituted in accordance with Section 6 of the said Act which consists of the Corporation, the Standing Committees and the Commissioner. Under Section 7 of the said Act, the Corporation consists of the elected councilors and the nominated councilors as well as certain members of the House of People and the State Legislative Assembly. As provided under Section 8 of the said Act, the term of the councilors shall be five years that is how the term of the Corporation is five years. The term of third respondent expired on 12th March 2019. In fact, considering the mandate of sub-clause (a) of clause (3) of Article 243U of the Constitution of India, the process of the election to constitute Corporation ought to have been completed before 12th March 2019. But, even five months thereafter, the process of election has not yet commenced. Thus, by not holding the election to constitute the third respondent-Corporation, there has been a complete violation of the constitutional mandate.

(3.) The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the second respondent stated that in fact, the second respondent had approached this Court and sought a writ of mandamus. He further stated that there was an impediment in the form of interim relief granted by this Court to conduct the election before 12th March 2019 and the interim order came to an end only 31st May 2019.