Case Note & Summary
The petitioner and respondents 1 to 4 contested the election for the post of Member of Chitradurga Taluk Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC) from the Agriculturists Constituency of Manangi Village. The election was held on 01.05.2011, and the petitioner was declared elected on 03.05.2011, having secured 974 votes against the 1st respondent who secured 671 votes. The 1st respondent challenged the election by filing an Election Petition on 23.05.2011 before the I Addl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Chitradurga. The learned Civil Judge allowed the election petition and declared that the election of the petitioner was void as he, being a licensed trader, was not eligible to contest the election from the agriculturists constituency. Additionally, a further declaration was made that the 1st respondent was elected. The petitioner appealed to the Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, who dismissed the appeal. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking to set aside the judgment of the appellate court and the trial court. The High Court, after hearing the parties, found that the concurrent findings of fact by both courts below were based on evidence and did not warrant interference under writ jurisdiction. The court noted that the petitioner had admitted to holding a trader's license, which disqualified him from being an agriculturist for the purpose of the election. The writ petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Election Law - Disqualification - Agriculturist Constituency - Section 15 of Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation and Development) Act, 1966 - The petitioner, a licensed trader, contested election from agriculturists constituency and was declared elected. The election was challenged on the ground that he was not an agriculturist. The trial court allowed the petition, declaring the election void. The High Court upheld the finding, holding that the petitioner being a licensed trader was not eligible to contest from the agriculturists constituency. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner, who held a license as a trader under the APMC Act, was eligible to contest the election from the agriculturists constituency.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. The judgment of the Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga dated 21.09.2013 in MA No.10/13 and the judgment of the I Addl. Civil Judge, Chitradurga dated 21.03.2013 in Ele.Mis.No.1/11 are upheld.
Law Points
- Election law
- Agricultural Produce Market Committee
- Disqualification
- Licensed trader
- Agriculturist constituency
- Section 15 of Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation and Development) Act
- 1966
Case Details
2013 LawText (KAR) (10) 11
Sri.Rama Bhat K (for petitioner), Sri.Spoorthy Hegde N (for caveator/respondent 1), Sri K.A.Ariga (AGA for respondents 5 & 6)
S N Lokeshawarappa @ S.N. Lokesh
Mr Farooqulla, Smt. Ratnamma, Sri. B.S. Ramesh, Sri. H. Suresh, Tahsildar / Returning Officer, Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee, Chitradurga, The Deputy Commissioner, Chitradurga District
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the judgment of the Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, which upheld the trial court's order declaring the petitioner's election as void.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought to set aside the judgment dated 21.09.2013 in MA No.10/13 passed by the Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga, and consequently set aside the judgment dated 21.03.2013 in Ele.Mis.No.1/11 passed by the I Addl. Civil Judge, Chitradurga.
Filing Reason
The petitioner's election was declared void by the trial court on the ground that he was a licensed trader and thus not eligible to contest from the agriculturists constituency.
Previous Decisions
The trial court (I Addl. Civil Judge, Chitradurga) allowed the election petition and declared the petitioner's election void, further declaring the 1st respondent as elected. The appellate court (Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga) dismissed the petitioner's appeal.
Issues
Whether the petitioner, being a licensed trader, was eligible to contest the election from the agriculturists constituency under the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation and Development) Act, 1966.
Whether the concurrent findings of fact by the courts below warrant interference under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the courts below erred in holding that he was not an agriculturist and that he was a licensed trader.
Respondents supported the concurrent findings and argued that the petitioner had admitted to holding a trader's license.
Ratio Decidendi
A person holding a trader's license under the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation and Development) Act, 1966 is disqualified from contesting an election from the agriculturists constituency. Concurrent findings of fact based on evidence cannot be interfered with under writ jurisdiction unless perverse.
Judgment Excerpts
Petitioner and respondents 1 to 4 herein had contested election for the post of Member of Chitradurga Taluk Agricultural Produce Market Committee (for short, ‘APMC’) from Agriculturists Constituency of Manangi Village.
The learned Civil Judge allowed the election petition and declared that the election of the petitioner herein was void as he being a licensed trader was not eligible to contest the election from the agriculturists constituency.
The learned Judge in appeal has also concurred with the findings recorded by the trial Court.
The concurrent findings of fact recorded by both the Courts below are based on evidence and do not call for interference in a proceeding under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
Procedural History
Election held on 01.05.2011; result declared on 03.05.2011; election petition filed on 23.05.2011 before I Addl. Civil Judge, Chitradurga; trial court allowed petition on 21.03.2013; appeal filed before Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga; appeal dismissed on 21.09.2013; writ petition filed before High Court of Karnataka on 29.10.2013.
Acts & Sections
- Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation and Development) Act, 1966: Section 15
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
