Case Note & Summary
The case involved a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India filed by fourteen individuals who were elected as members of Yamanoor Gram Panchayat in a general election held on April 4, 2016. The total strength of the Gram Panchayat was 22 members, comprising four constituencies: Yamanoor (6 seats), Padesur (6 seats), Kumaragoppa (2 seats), and Arekurahatti (8 seats). Due to a complete boycott by the villagers of Arekurahatti, no election took place for those eight seats, leaving only fourteen elected members. As per Section 5(7) of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, a Gram Panchayat is deemed constituted only when two-thirds of its total members are elected. In this case, the authorities took the view that two-thirds of 22, which is 14.6, required fifteen members, and since only fourteen were elected, the Panchayat was not constituted. Consequently, an Administrator was appointed. The election authorities made seven attempts to conduct elections in Arekurahatti, all unsuccessful due to boycotts. On March 8, 2021, the State Election Commission issued a notification for fresh elections to the entire Gram Panchayat, prompting the petitioners to challenge it. The petitioners argued that their term of office had not commenced because the Panchayat was never constituted, that the fraction should be rounded down to fourteen, and that no valid Administrator had been appointed. The respondents contended that the fraction must be rounded up, that the term of five years had effectively been completed, and that the notification was valid. The court examined the statutory provisions and relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Ganesh Sukhdeo Gurule v. Tahsildar, Sinnar, (2019) 3 SCC 211, which held that when computing majorities involving fractions of a person, the fraction must be treated as one. Applying this principle, the court held that 14.6 must be rounded to fifteen, and therefore, fourteen elected members were insufficient to constitute the Panchayat under Section 5(7). The court found no irregularity in the election notification and dismissed the writ petition.
Headnote
A) Panchayat Law - Constitution of Gram Panchayat - Computation of Two-Thirds Majority - Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, Section 5(7) - When computing two-thirds of the total number of members for constitution of a Gram Panchayat, any fraction is to be rounded up to the next whole number. Therefore, where total members are 22, two-thirds is 14.6, requiring 15 elected members. Since only 14 members were elected, the Gram Panchayat was not deemed constituted, and the election notification was valid. Held that the impugned notification does not suffer from any infirmity. (Paras 11-13)
Issue of Consideration
Whether 14 members out of a total of 22 elected to the Gram Panchayat constitute the requisite two-thirds majority under Section 5(7) of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, for the Panchayat to be deemed constituted, and whether the impugned election notification is valid.
Final Decision
The writ petition was dismissed. The court held that two-thirds of 22 is 14.6, and following Supreme Court precedent, the fraction must be considered as one, making the required number 15. Since only 14 members were elected, the Panchayat was not duly constituted under Section 5(7), and the election notification was valid.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- Interpretation of Section 5(7) of Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act
- 1993
- fraction in computing two-thirds majority must be rounded up to the next whole number
- Ganesh Sukhdeo Gurule v. Tahsildar
- Sinnar (2019) 3 SCC 211
Case Details
2026 LawText (KAR) (05) 29
WRIT PETITION No.100917/2021 (LB-ELE)
J.S. Shetty, Deepa Udiyar, Vidyavati K. Kotturshettar, Shivaprabhu S. Hiremath, S. Rajashekhar, Vijay Malali, C.S. Patil, Umesh P.H.
Sri. Vijayakumar Hemareddi Hallikeri, Doddahasansab Sa.H S/o Hasansab Yaligar, Smt. Savita Siddalingesh Sharanadagouda, Rajaram S/o Dondiba Mohite, Rukmavva Venkareddi Karakareddi, Neelavva Venkappa Sanjeevannavar, Somappa Nagappa Totad, Mahantesh Yallappa Gunnar, Madhu W/o Yella Reddy, Renavva W/o Kariyappa Turamari, Hanamappa S/o Bhimappa Kali, Annapurna W/o Ramanagouda Patil, Mahantesh S/o Andanayya Kulkarni, Shantavva Bhimappa Talawar
The State of Karnataka, State Election Commission, Karnataka, Deputy Commissioner, Dharwad, Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Panchayath, Dharwad, Yamanoor Grama Panchayath, Administrator, Yamanoor Grama Panchayath, Sri. Hemaraddi S/o Nagaraddi Lingaraddi
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging election notification for Gram Panchayat
Remedy Sought
Quashing of notification dated 08.03.2021 to hold election to Yamanoor Gram Panchayat; direction to hold meeting of existing members to elect Adhyaksha/Upadhyaksha and allow petitioners to continue as members; direction to hold re-election for unfilled 8 seats of Arekurahatti village
Filing Reason
The Election Commission issued a notification for fresh election to the Gram Panchayat despite petitioners being elected members whose term had allegedly not commenced because the Panchayat was never constituted under Section 5(7) of the Act.
Previous Decisions
Previous decisions not referenced
Issues
Whether 14 members out of total 22 elected members constitute two-thirds majority under Section 5(7) of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, for the Panchayat to be deemed constituted.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that 14 out of 22 (14/22 = 0.636) rounds down to 14, which meets the two-thirds requirement; their term had not commenced because no meeting was held; the Administrator was invalidly continued.
Respondents argued that 2/3 of 22 is 14.6, which must be rounded up to 15; since only 14 were elected, the Panchayat was not constituted; the term of five years had effectively been completed; the election notification was valid.
Ratio Decidendi
When computing two-thirds majority under Section 5(7) of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, any fraction must be rounded up to the next whole number, relying on Ganesh Sukhdeo Gurule v. Tahsildar, Sinnar (2019) 3 SCC 211. Therefore, 14.6 is rounded to 15, and 14 elected members are insufficient to constitute the Panchayat.
Judgment Excerpts
where two-thirds of the total number of members of any Grama Panchayat have been elected, the Grama Panchayat shall be deemed to have been duly constituted under this Act.
2/3 rd of 22 members is 14.6%. If consideration of fraction in respect of a person concerned, it has to be considered as ‘1’.
Procedural History
General election held on 04.04.2016; petitioners elected as members of Yamanoor Gram Panchayat; declaration of elected members on 17.06.2016; 8 seats from Arekurahatti remained unfilled due to boycott; Administrator appointed; Election Commission made seven attempts to conduct election in Arekurahatti, all unsuccessful; On 08.03.2021, Election Commission issued notification for fresh election to entire Gram Panchayat; Petitioners filed writ petition challenging that notification; Court heard arguments and dismissed the petition on 29.06.2021.
Acts & Sections
- Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993: Section 2(15), Section 5(7), Section 8(1), Section 41, Section 42, Section 268
- Constitution of India: Article 226, Article 227
