Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, who were corporators of the Corporation of the City of Belgaum, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent (Regional Commissioner) not to allow Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs) and Members of Parliament (MPs) to vote and participate in the election of the Mayor and Deputy Mayor for the year 2013 and for further elections. The petitioners argued that MLAs and MPs should not be permitted to vote in the municipal corporation elections. The court heard the arguments of the petitioners' counsel, Sri D. Ravikumar Gokakakar, and the respondents' counsel, including the High Court Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 2 and the advocate for respondent 4. The court observed that a writ of mandamus is a discretionary remedy and cannot be granted unless the petitioner establishes a legal right in themselves or a statutory duty on the part of the respondent. The petitioners failed to point out any provision of law that prohibits MLAs or MPs from voting in the election of the Mayor and Deputy Mayor. Consequently, the court found no merit in the petition and dismissed it.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Discretionary Remedy - No Legal Right - Petitioners sought mandamus to prevent MLAs/MPs from voting in Mayor election - Court held that mandamus is discretionary and cannot be issued without establishing a legal right or statutory bar - Held that petitioners failed to show any provision prohibiting legislators from voting (Paras 1-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to restrain Members of Legislative Assembly and Members of Parliament from voting and participating in the election of Mayor and Deputy Mayor of a City Corporation.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed.
Law Points
- Writ of mandamus
- Discretionary remedy
- No legal right
- No statutory bar
- Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India
Case Details
2014 LawText (KAR) (03) 62
W.P.No.81902/2013 (LB-ELE)
Sri D. Ravikumar Gokakakkar for petitioners; Sriyuts A.G. Maldar, HCGP for R1 and R2; Arvind D. Kulkarni for R4; R3 served
Kiran Krishnarao Saynak, Pandhari Pundalik Parab, Vijay Laxman Patil
State of Karnataka, Regional Commissioner, Election Commissioner, Commissioner of Corporation of the City of Belgaum
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition seeking mandamus to prevent MLAs and MPs from voting in Mayor and Deputy Mayor election of Belgaum City Corporation.
Remedy Sought
Writ of mandamus directing the second respondent not to allow MLAs and MPs to vote and participate in the election of Mayor and Deputy Mayor for 2013 and henceforth.
Filing Reason
Petitioners, being corporators, sought to exclude MLAs and MPs from voting in the mayoral election.
Issues
Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to restrain MLAs and MPs from voting in the election of Mayor and Deputy Mayor of a City Corporation.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that MLAs and MPs should not be permitted to vote in the election of Mayor and Deputy Mayor.
Ratio Decidendi
A writ of mandamus is a discretionary remedy and cannot be granted unless the petitioner establishes a legal right in themselves or a statutory duty on the part of the respondent. The petitioners failed to point out any provision of law that prohibits MLAs or MPs from voting in the election of the Mayor and Deputy Mayor.
Judgment Excerpts
Petitioners are seeking for a writ of mandamus to 2nd respondent not to permit the members of the Legislative Assembly, Members of House of people, to vote and participate in the process of elections of the Mayor and Deputy Mayor for the 4th respondent-Corporation of the City of Belgaum for the year 2013 and henceforth.
I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.
A writ of mandamus is a discretionary remedy and unless the petitioner establishes a legal right in themselves or a statutory duty on the part of the respondent, the same cannot be granted. In the instant case, the petitioners have not pointed out any provision of law which prohibits the members of the Legislative Assembly or the Members of the House of People from voting in the election of the Mayor and Deputy Mayor. Hence, I do not find any merit in this petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
Procedural History
The writ petition was filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. It came up for orders before the High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, and was dismissed on 03-03-2014.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
