K R VENKATESH Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHITRADURGA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON the application filed by respondent 4, the Deputy Commissioner initiated the proceedings under Section 16 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act (for short 'the Act') by issuing a show-cause notice as per Annexure-A. The allegations made in the show-cause notice is that the petitioner is a defaulter having not paid the amount due to the Municipal Council and therefore, he is disqualified from holding the post of councillor in the Municipal Council. Immediately after the receipt of the show-cause notice, the petitioner has filed a reply as per Annexure-B denying the allegations made in the show-cause notice. The Deputy commissioner considering the reply submitted by the petitioner to the show-cause notice has passed the order under Section 16 (2) of the Act, declaring that the post held by the petitioner has become vacant. As against this order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Divisional Commissioner under Section 16 (3) of the Act. The Divisional commissioner dismissed the appeal confirming the order of the Deputy commissioner. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court.

(2.) SRI B. G. Sridharan, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order of the Deputy Commissioner is liable to be quashed as it is opposed to the principles of natural justice. In support of this the learned Counsel has drawn my attention to Section 16 (3) of the Act. The proviso to Section 16 (3) of the Act, reads as follows :

(3.) UNDER the above said proviso, the Deputy Commissioner and Divisional Commissioner are expected to afford an opportunity of hearing before passing the order either under sub-section (2) or (3) of Section 16 of the Act. Admittedly, in this case, the Deputy Commissioner has not afforded the opportunity of hearing before passing the order. If that is so, the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner is liable to be quashed.