High Court of Karnataka Quashes Reservation Notification for ST Female Adhyaksha of Gram Panchayat Due to Non-Compliance with Rotation Policy. The court held that the reservation of the post of Adhyaksha of Chandanhalli Gram Panchayat for ST Female for the 2020-II (2023) term was illegal as it violated the rotation policy under the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: KALABURAGI In Favour of Accused
  • 61
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Sri Shivanand, a member of Chandanhalli Gram Panchayat, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the reservation notification issued by the District Election Officer (respondent No. 3) for the post of Adhyaksha (President) of Chandanhalli Gram Panchayat for the 2020-II (2023) term. The notification reserved the post for a Scheduled Tribe (ST) Female candidate. The petitioner contended that the reservation violated the rotation policy mandated under Section 44(4) of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, and the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Reservation of Offices of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Gram Panchayat) Rules, 1995. He argued that in the previous term (2020-I), the post of Adhyaksha was already reserved for ST Female, and thus reserving it again for the same category in the current term was illegal. The respondents, including the State Election Commission and the District Election Officer, defended the notification, claiming it was issued in accordance with the rules. The court examined the reservation history and found that the post had indeed been reserved for ST Female in the 2020-I term. The court held that Section 44(4) of the Act requires rotation of reservation among categories, and the rules prescribe a specific rotation cycle. Since the post was reserved for ST Female in the previous term, it could not be reserved for the same category in the current term. The court quashed the impugned notification and directed the respondents to redo the reservation in accordance with the rotation policy and law.

Headnote

A) Panchayat Raj - Reservation of Office of Adhyaksha - Rotation Policy - Sections 44(4) and 44(5) of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 read with Rules 3 and 4 of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Reservation of Offices of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Gram Panchayat) Rules, 1995 - The petitioner challenged the reservation of the post of Adhyaksha of Chandanhalli Gram Panchayat for ST Female for the 2020-II (2023) term, arguing that it violated the rotation policy. The court examined the reservation history and found that the post had been reserved for ST Female in the previous term (2020-I) and thus could not be reserved again for the same category in the current term without following the rotation cycle. Held that the impugned notification was illegal and quashed it, directing the respondents to redo the reservation in accordance with law. (Paras 1-10)

B) Panchayat Raj - Reservation of Office of Adhyaksha - Rotation Policy - Section 44(4) of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 - The court interpreted Section 44(4) to require that reservation of offices of Adhyaksha must be rotated among different categories (SC, ST, OBC, General) and that no office can be reserved for the same category in two consecutive terms. The court relied on the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Reservation of Offices of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Gram Panchayat) Rules, 1995, which prescribe the rotation cycle. Held that the respondents failed to adhere to the rotation policy, rendering the reservation notification invalid. (Paras 5-8)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the reservation of the post of Adhyaksha of Chandanhalli Gram Panchayat for ST Female for the 2020-II (2023) term is valid and in accordance with the rotation policy under the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned notification (Annexure-D) reserving the post of Adhyaksha of Chandanhalli Gram Panchayat for ST Female for the 2020-II (2023) term, and directed the respondents to redo the reservation in accordance with the rotation policy and law.

Law Points

  • Reservation of offices of Adhyaksha in Gram Panchayats must follow the rotation policy as per Section 44(4) of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act
  • 1993
  • and the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Reservation of Offices of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Gram Panchayat) Rules
  • 1995
  • any deviation from the prescribed rotation renders the reservation notification illegal and liable to be quashed.
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2023 LawText (KAR) (07) 98

WP No. 201732 of 2023 (LB-ELE)

2023-07-11

Suraj Govindaraj

Sri Gourish S Khashampur (for petitioner); Smt. Maya T.R., HCGP (for R1, R3, R6); Sri K.N. Paneedra, Sr. Counsel for Sri Amaresh S. Roja (for R2); Sri Prashanth S. Kumman (for R4, R5, R7)

Sri Shivanand S/o Mailari Kadgonda

The State of Karnataka, Department of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj; The State Election Commission; The District Election Officer and the Deputy Commissioner, Bidar District; The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Panchayat, Bidar; The Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayat, Humnabad; The Tahsildar, Humnabad Taluk; The Panchayat Development Officer, Maniknagar Gram Panchayat

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging the reservation notification for the post of Adhyaksha of a Gram Panchayat.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought quashing of the reservation notification for ST Female for the post of Adhyaksha of Chandanhalli Gram Panchayat for the 2020-II (2023) term.

Filing Reason

The petitioner alleged that the reservation violated the rotation policy under the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, as the post was already reserved for ST Female in the previous term.

Issues

Whether the reservation of the post of Adhyaksha of Chandanhalli Gram Panchayat for ST Female for the 2020-II (2023) term is valid and in accordance with the rotation policy under the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the reservation for ST Female in the current term was illegal as the same post was reserved for ST Female in the previous term (2020-I), violating the rotation policy. Respondents contended that the notification was issued in accordance with the rules and defended its validity.

Ratio Decidendi

The reservation of offices of Adhyaksha in Gram Panchayats must strictly follow the rotation policy as mandated by Section 44(4) of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, and the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Reservation of Offices of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Gram Panchayat) Rules, 1995. Any deviation from the prescribed rotation, such as reserving the same post for the same category in consecutive terms, renders the reservation notification illegal and liable to be quashed.

Judgment Excerpts

The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a. Quash the 2020-II (2023) Term President and Vice President of Humnabad Taluk in respect reservation of ST Female for the post of Adhyaksha of Chandanhalli Gram Panchayat which is produced at Annexure-D issued by respondent No.3.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench, challenging the reservation notification. The petition came up for preliminary hearing in 'B' group and was disposed of on the same day.

Acts & Sections

  • Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993: 44(4), 44(5)
  • Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Reservation of Offices of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Gram Panchayat) Rules, 1995: 3, 4
  • Constitution of India: 226, 227
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Quashes Reservation Notification for ST Female Adhyaksha of Gram Panchayat Due to Non-Compliance with Rotation Policy. The court held that the reservation of the post of Adhyaksha of Chandanhalli Gram Panchayat for ST Female f...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Probate Petition for Will and Codicil of Dr. Bharati Nanavati Due to Suspicious Circumstances and Failure to Prove Execution. Court finds that the Will and Codicil were not proved in accordance with Section 63 of the India...