High Court of Karnataka Hears Multiple Writ Petitions Challenging Ward Reservation Notifications in Municipal Elections. Petitions Seek to Quash Notifications Alleging Irregularities in Reservation of Wards Under Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 and Related Laws.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The High Court of Karnataka heard a batch of writ petitions filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging various notifications issued by the State Government regarding reservation of wards for elections to municipal corporations, city municipal councils, and town municipal councils. Petitioners from multiple municipalities, including Mangalore City Corporation, Madikere Municipality, Harapanahalli Town Municipal Council, Tiptur City Municipal Council, Bhadravathi City Municipal Council, and others, sought quashing of notifications dated 30.07.2018 and 10.08.2018, inter alia on the ground that the final notification altered reservations from those in draft notifications, affecting their rights to contest. Specific wards challenged included Ward No. 19, Derebail (West) Ward No. 25, and others. The petitioners contended that the State Government erred in reserving wards for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Backward Classes, or Women in an arbitrary manner. The matters were listed before Justice S. Sunil Dutt Yadav on 14 January 2019. However, the provided judgment text is a compilation of case numbers and party details without any recorded submissions, findings, or final order. Consequently, the outcome and reasoning remain unknown.

Issue of Consideration

KAHC010005872019_1

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2019 LawText (KAR) (01) 24

W.P. No.44499/2018 (LB-ELE) c/w W.P. Nos. 50796/2018, 53609-53611/2018, 54664/2018, 43519/2018, 44520/2018, 50791-50794/2018, 51593-51596/2018, 50447/2018, 53599/2018, 38720/2018, 35959/2018, 53832/2018, 53495/2018, 40752-40756/2018, 53279/2018, 55599/2018, 53120/2018, 52537/2018, 52996-52997/2018, 54041-54042/2018, 32063/2018, 40746-40750/2018, 332/2019, 370/2019, 371/2019, 373-374/2019, 570/2019, 571/2019, 861-865/2019, 872/2019, 1212-1216/2019, 52008/2018, 41987/2018, 49473-49474/2018, 36970/2018, 36971/2018, 36972/2018, 55976/2018.

2019-01-14

S. Sunil Dutt Yadav

Multiple advocates, including Sri Abishek Marla M.J., Sri Ashok Haranahalli, Sri Manmohan P.N., Sri Rajaram Sooryambail, Sri Dhananjay Kumar, Sri Udaya Prakash Muliya, Sri Rahul S. Reddy, Sri Devi Prasad Shetty, Sri S. Basavaraj, Sri M. Ravindranath, Sri Naveen J. N., Sri Nagarajappa A., Sri Mahesh R. Uppin, Sri H.C. Shivaramu for petitioners; Sri K.N.Phaneendra, Smt. Vaishali Hegde, Sri Vishwajith Shetty, Sri Dinesh Rao, Additional Advocate General, Smt. Prathima Honnapura, Sri S.Rajashekar, Smt. Anusuya Devi, Sri R.Subramanya, Sri D.C. Jagadeesh for respondents.

Mr. Ravindra Nayak (lead petitioner in W.P. No.44499/2018) and other petitioners in connected matters

Karnataka State Election Commission, Mangalore City Corporation, State of Karnataka, Smt. Kavita Sanil, Sri Mahabala Marla (respondents in W.P. No.44499/2018) and others in connected matters

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

Nature of Litigation

Challenge to reservation of wards in municipal elections

Remedy Sought

Petitioners sought quashing of impugned notifications dated 30.07.2018 and 10.08.2018 and directions for proper reservation

Filing Reason

Alleged improper reservation of wards by State Government; final notification altered draft reservation without lawful basis

Procedural History

The writ petitions were filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution and were listed for hearing before Justice S. Sunil Dutt Yadav on 14.01.2019. No further procedural history mentioned.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Bombay at Goa Examines Quashing of Dowry Death Charges under Sections 304B and 306 IPC on the Basis of Family Settlement. The court considered the effect of dropping the charge under Section 498A IPC on the charge under Section 304B IPC...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court Allows Appeal Against Dismissal of Malicious Prosecution Suit, Holds Suit Not Barred by Limitation as Prosecution Terminated After Supreme Court Dismissed Special Leave Petition. Appellate Court's Order Setting Aside Entire Trial Court Dec...