Karnataka High Court Quashes Removal of Gram Panchayat Members for Violation of Natural Justice. Section 49 of Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 Requires Show Cause Notice Before Removal.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: DHARWAD In Favour of Accused
  • 59
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, former President and Vice-President of Chandavar Gram Panchayat and former President of Valgalli Gram Panchayat, challenged the order dated 23.03.2017 passed by the Deputy Director and Ex Officio Government Under Secretary, Department of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj, removing them as members of the respective Gram Panchayats under Section 49 of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993. The removal was based on an enquiry report submitted by the Karnataka Lokayukta. The petitioners contended that no show cause notice or opportunity of hearing was given to them before passing the impugned order, violating principles of natural justice. The respondents argued that the Lokayukta report itself constituted sufficient material and that the petitioners were given an opportunity during the enquiry. The court examined the provisions of Section 49 of the Act, which requires the government to give an opportunity of hearing to the member before removal. The court found that the impugned order did not record any opportunity of hearing having been given to the petitioners. The court held that the order was passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice and the statutory mandate. Consequently, the court quashed the impugned order and directed the respondents to provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners before taking any further action. The writ petitions were allowed.

Headnote

A) Panchayat Raj - Removal of Members - Section 49 Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 - Natural Justice - Petitioners were removed as members of Gram Panchayat based on a Lokayukta report without being issued a show cause notice or afforded an opportunity of hearing - Court held that the order of removal is in gross violation of principles of natural justice and Section 49 of the Act which mandates an opportunity of hearing - Impugned order quashed (Paras 1-10).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the order of removal of the petitioners as members of Gram Panchayat under Section 49 of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 is valid when no opportunity of hearing was afforded to them.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The writ petitions are allowed. The impugned order dated 23.03.2017 passed by respondent No.2 is quashed. The respondents are directed to provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners before taking any further action in the matter.

Law Points

  • Principles of natural justice
  • audi alteram partem
  • Section 49 Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act 1993
  • removal of elected members
  • opportunity of hearing
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2020 LawText (KAR) (12) 22

Writ Petition No.103762 of 2017 & Writ Petition No.104132 of 2017 c/w Writ Petition No.104100 of 2017 (GM-KLA)

2020-12-08

G. Narendar, M.I. Arun

K.S. Patil, G.K. Hiregoudar, G.I. Gachchinamath, Anant Hegde, Vishwanath Hegde, H.R. Deshpande

Smt. Bhavani W/o Narayan, Asif Ali Abdul Gafar Gani, Bastav Dumming

State of Karnataka, Deputy Director and Ex Officio Govt Under Secretary, Karnataka Lokayukta, Chief Executive Officer Zilla Panchayat, Secretary Gram Panchayat

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

Nature of Litigation

Writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of removal of petitioners as members of Gram Panchayat.

Remedy Sought

Quashing of the order dated 23.03.2017 passed by respondent No.2 removing petitioners as members of Gram Panchayat.

Filing Reason

Petitioners were removed as members of Gram Panchayat without being given an opportunity of hearing, in violation of principles of natural justice and Section 49 of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993.

Issues

Whether the impugned order of removal is valid when no opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioners. Whether the principles of natural justice were violated.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued that no show cause notice or opportunity of hearing was given before passing the removal order, violating natural justice. Respondents contended that the Lokayukta report provided sufficient material and that petitioners were given opportunity during the enquiry.

Ratio Decidendi

The removal of a member of Gram Panchayat under Section 49 of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 requires that the member be given an opportunity of hearing. Failure to provide such opportunity renders the order void as it violates principles of natural justice.

Judgment Excerpts

The impugned order does not record that any opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioners. The order is in gross violation of the principles of natural justice and the statutory mandate under Section 49 of the Act.

Procedural History

The petitioners filed writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 23.03.2017 passed by respondent No.2 removing them as members of Gram Panchayat. The petitions were heard together and disposed of by this common order.

Acts & Sections

  • Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993: Section 49
  • Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Grants Leave to Defend in Commercial Summary Suit for Recovery Under Deed of Cancellation — Triable Issues Raised Regarding Validity of Agreement and Quantum of Amount. The court held that the defendant raised substantial triable ...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Withdrawal of Writ Petition with Liberty to Approach Competent Court. Petitioner permitted to withdraw petition and file fresh petition within three weeks; ad interim order continued for three weeks.