High Court of Karnataka Directs Deputy Commissioner to Consider Representations for Division of Panchayat Assets Under Section 118(2) of Karnataka Grama Swaraj and Panchayath Raj Act, 1993. The court deprecated litigation between two Grama Panchayaths over allocation of public funds and assets, holding that the Deputy Commissioner must decide on the division of assets and liabilities as per the statute.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
  • 3
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Ayanur Grama Panchayath, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the Deputy Commissioner, Shivamogga District (respondent No.2), to consider its representations (Annexures D and E) and pass appropriate orders under Section 118(2) of the Karnataka Grama Swaraj and Panchayath Raj Act, 1993, for effecting division/transfer of panchayat funds, properties, debts, and obligations between the petitioner and respondent No.3, Kohalli Grama Panchayath. The court noted that the case presented an ugly and shameful instance of two public bodies fighting against each other for allocation of assets and funds meant for public revenue and developmental works. The court observed that the Deputy Commissioner had not considered the representations despite the statutory obligation under Section 118(2). The court directed the Deputy Commissioner to consider the representations and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order. The court also deprecated the practice of public bodies engaging in litigation over public assets, emphasizing that such disputes should be resolved administratively.

Headnote

A) Panchayati Raj - Division of Assets - Section 118(2) Karnataka Grama Swaraj and Panchayath Raj Act, 1993 - Duty of Deputy Commissioner - The petitioner Grama Panchayath sought direction to the Deputy Commissioner to consider its representations for division of assets and liabilities between two panchayaths. The court held that the Deputy Commissioner must consider the representations and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, as the statute mandates such consideration. (Paras 1-26)

B) Public Interest - Litigation between Public Bodies - Unseemly Conduct - The court deprecated the practice of two public bodies litigating over allocation of public assets and funds, stating that such disputes should be resolved administratively and not through adversarial litigation. (Paras 1-26)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Deputy Commissioner is obligated to consider and pass orders on representations made by a Grama Panchayath for division/transfer of funds, properties, debts, and obligations between two Grama Panchayaths under Section 118(2) of the Karnataka Grama Swaraj and Panchayath Raj Act, 1993.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court directed the Deputy Commissioner, Shivamogga District, to consider the representations made by the petitioner (Annexures D and E) and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.

Law Points

  • Section 118(2) of Karnataka Grama Swaraj and Panchayath Raj Act
  • 1993
  • Division of assets and liabilities of panchayaths
  • Duty of Deputy Commissioner to consider representations
  • Public bodies should not litigate over public assets
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2016 LawText (KAR) (06) 4

Writ Petition 20873/2016 (LB-RES)

2016-06-15

Dr. Vineet Kothari

G. Lakshmeesh Rao for Petitioner, V. Sreenidhi for R1 & R2, R. Sharath Chandra for R3 to R5

Ayanur Grama Panchayath

State of Karnataka, Deputy Commissioner, Shivamogga District, Kohalli Grama Panchayath, Shivamogga Taluk Panchayath, Shivamogga Zilla Panchayath

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

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India seeking direction to Deputy Commissioner to consider representations for division of panchayat assets and liabilities.

Remedy Sought

Direction to respondent No.2 (Deputy Commissioner) to consider representations (Annexures D and E) and pass orders under Section 118(2) of the Karnataka Grama Swaraj and Panchayath Raj Act, 1993 for division/transfer of funds, properties, debts, and obligations between Ayanur and Kohalli Grama Panchayaths.

Filing Reason

Failure of the Deputy Commissioner to consider the petitioner's representations for division of assets and liabilities between two Grama Panchayaths.

Issues

Whether the Deputy Commissioner is obligated to consider and pass orders on representations made under Section 118(2) of the Karnataka Grama Swaraj and Panchayath Raj Act, 1993.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the Deputy Commissioner failed to consider its representations despite statutory duty under Section 118(2). Respondents did not oppose the petition; they submitted that the Deputy Commissioner would consider the representations.

Ratio Decidendi

The Deputy Commissioner has a statutory duty under Section 118(2) of the Karnataka Grama Swaraj and Panchayath Raj Act, 1993 to consider representations for division of assets and liabilities between panchayaths and pass appropriate orders. Public bodies should not engage in adversarial litigation over public assets; such disputes should be resolved administratively.

Judgment Excerpts

The present case brings-forth a very ugly and shameful instance of two public bodies, namely, Grama Panchayaths fighting against each other for allocation of their respective assets and funds which they are supposed to have, to generate the public revenue to undertake the developmental works in accordance with law and subject to the Karnataka Gram Panchayath Raj Act, 1993.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru on an unspecified date. The petition came up for orders on 15 June 2016, and the court disposed it with directions.

Acts & Sections

  • Karnataka Grama Swaraj and Panchayath Raj Act, 1993: 118(2)
  • Constitution of India: 226, 227
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Directs Deputy Commissioner to Consider Representations for Division of Panchayat Assets Under Section 118(2) of Karnataka Grama Swaraj and Panchayath Raj Act, 1993. The court deprecated litigation between two Grama Panchayath...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Upholds Eviction Decree for Non-User of Commercial Premises Under Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. Tenant's failure to use the suit premises for a continuous period of six months without reasonable cause constitutes ground for ev...