Case Note & Summary
The case pertains to a challenge against a notice of no-confidence motion issued by members of the Gram Panchayat, Sangankall, against the Adhyaksha (President) and Upadhyaksha (Vice-President) of the Panchayat. The appellants, Smt. Parvathi and Smt. Yerremma, who held the positions of Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha respectively, filed a writ petition before the Single Judge of the High Court of Karnataka seeking to quash the notice of no-confidence motion dated 27.02.2019 issued by 14 members of the Gram Panchayat. The Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on 01.03.2019, holding that the court cannot interfere with the notice of no-confidence motion at the stage of notice, as the motion is yet to be moved and voted upon. Aggrieved, the appellants filed the present writ appeals under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961. The Division Bench, comprising Justice Krishna S. Dixit and Justice Bellunke A.S., heard the appeals on 08.03.2019. The court noted that the no-confidence motion was governed by Section 49 of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, which provides a complete mechanism for moving and deciding such motions. The court held that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India should not be exercised to stall the democratic process of a no-confidence motion at the notice stage. The court observed that the remedy, if any, for the appellants would arise only after the motion is actually moved and a decision is taken. The Division Bench found no merit in the appeals and dismissed them, upholding the order of the Single Judge. The court did not interfere with the notice of no-confidence motion, allowing the democratic process to take its course.
Headnote
A) Panchayat Raj - No-confidence Motion - Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha - Section 49 of Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 - The appellants, Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Gram Panchayat, challenged the notice of no-confidence motion issued by members. The Single Judge dismissed the writ petition holding that the motion could not be interdicted at the notice stage. The Division Bench affirmed, holding that the court should not interfere with the democratic process of no-confidence motion before it is actually moved and voted upon. (Paras 1-5) B) Writ Jurisdiction - Interference with Legislative Proceedings - No-confidence Motion - The court held that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India should not be exercised to stall a no-confidence motion at the stage of notice. The remedy, if any, arises only after the motion is moved and decided. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court in writ jurisdiction can interfere with the notice of no-confidence motion against the Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of a Gram Panchayat before the motion is actually moved and voted upon.
Final Decision
The Division Bench dismissed the writ appeals, upholding the order of the Single Judge. The court held that it would not interfere with the notice of no-confidence motion at the stage of notice, as the motion is yet to be moved and voted upon. The appeals were dismissed.
Law Points
- No-confidence motion
- Gram Panchayat
- Adhyaksha
- Upadhyaksha
- Section 49 Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act
- 1993
- Writ jurisdiction
- Interference with legislative proceedings
- Democratic process
