Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Durgappa and Sharanamma, were Presidents of Bappur Gram Panchayat and Tidigol Gram Panchayat respectively. They filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the list of reserved constituencies (Annexures-A and A1) issued by the District Election Officer (respondent No.3) for the said Gram Panchayats. The petitioners contended that the reservation rotation policy mandated under Section 161 of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 and Rule 3 of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Reservation of Seats) Rules, 1997 was not followed while preparing the impugned list. The respondents, including the State of Karnataka, State Election Commission, and other officials, appeared through counsel. The court examined the records and found that the rotation of reserved categories was not in accordance with the statutory scheme. The court held that the impugned list is liable to be quashed and directed the respondents to issue a fresh list in compliance with the reservation rotation policy. The writ petition was allowed.
Headnote
A) Panchayat Raj - Reservation Rotation - Section 161 Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, Rule 3 Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Reservation of Seats) Rules, 1997 - The petitioners challenged the list of reserved constituencies for Bappur and Tidigol Gram Panchayats on the ground that the reservation rotation policy was not followed. The court examined the records and found that the rotation of reserved categories was not in accordance with the statutory scheme. Held that the impugned list is liable to be quashed and the respondents are directed to issue a fresh list in compliance with the rotation policy (Paras 1-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the impugned list of reserved constituencies for Bappur Gram Panchayat and Tidigol Gram Panchayat issued by the District Election Officer is in compliance with the reservation rotation policy mandated under Section 161 of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 and Rule 3 of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Reservation of Seats) Rules, 1997.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned list dated nil issued by respondent No.3 as per Annexures-A and A1 for Bappur Gram Panchayat and Tidigol Gram Panchayat is quashed. The respondents are directed to issue a fresh list in compliance with the reservation rotation policy under Section 161 of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 and Rule 3 of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Reservation of Seats) Rules, 1997.
Law Points
- Reservation rotation policy
- Gram Panchayat elections
- Section 161 Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act
- 1993
- Rule 3 Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Reservation of Seats) Rules
- 1997
- Mandatory compliance
- Quashing of notification
