Sanna Nagappa vs State of Karnataka and Others

B. Manohar, J.—The petitioner in this writ petition has sought for quashing the endorsement dated 05.06.2015 issued by the 4th respondent and also sought for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to announce the result of the election held to Karekallu Gram Panchayat of Tambrahalli village.

The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition is that pursuant to the reservation notification issued by the Deputy Commissioner, out of two seats allotted for Tambrahalli village. Petitioner contested for one seat which was reserved for ST category. His nomination paper was accepted, symbol was allotted and he was allowed to contest the election. In the election he has secured highest number of votes. However, his result was not announced on the ground that the seat to which the petitioner contested was reserved for ST (Woman) category and he is not eligible to contest the election. Hence, the election results cannot be announced. Accordingly, an endorsement was issued on 05.06.2015. The said endorsement is questioned in this writ petition.

Smt. Vidya Iyer learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Deputy Commissioner issued a notification regarding reservation of seats to Karekallu village more particularly Tambrahalli. As per the notification Annexure-B, one seat in Tambrahalli was reserved for the ST (Gen) category and one seat is reserved for ST (Woman) category. The petitioner belonged to ST category. He has contested the election for the ST. (Gen) category. His nomination papers were also accepted. The Returning Officer also allotted symbol and he has contested the election and secured highest number of votes. Hence, it is not open to the respondents to withhold the result. The endorsement issued by the 4th respondent is contrary to law. The Deputy Commissioner has no power to hold fresh election in respect of one seat of Tambrahalli village. Action of the Deputy Commissioner withholding the result is wholly without jurisdiction. Further, the Deputy Commissioner cannot go contrary to the notification Annexure-B issued by him. Hence, petitioner sought for quashing the said endorsement and to announce the results of the election.

On the other hand, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 and 3 filed statement of objections and contended that the Deputy Commissioner issued notification on the basis of the instructions of the Election Commission on 28.04.2015 fixing the reservation to Karekallu village of Ballan taluk. As per the notification, out of 17 seats, 9 seats are reserved for General category and 8 seats are reserved for the reserved category. Further, out of 17 seats 9 seats are reserved for woman category. As per the notification issued by the Deputy Commissioner out of 8 seats reserved for the reserved category four seats have been reserved for woman category.

Proforma-II of the notification make it very clear that in so far as Karekallu Gram Panchayat is concerned, Karekallu-2 and Karekallu-3 are reserved for SC (W) category and Karekallu-1 and Karekallu-5 (Tambrahalli) it was reserved for ST (Woman) category. Among the unreserved category one seat is reserved for the general woman in Tambrahalli village is concerned. As per the notification issued by the Deputy Commissioner one seat at Tambrahalli village is reserved for the General Woman category and one seat is reserved for ST (Woman) category. The Returning Officer has to accept nomination paper and to conduct the election as per the notification issued by the Deputy Commissioner. Further, Annexure-B produced in the writ petition is not issued from the office of the Deputy Commissioner, the notification Annexure-B is contrary to the notification of the Deputy Commissioner and also Proforma-II of the said notification. The Returning Officer without verifying the notification permitted the petitioner to file nomination paper, allotted symbol and conducted election. Subsequent to the election it was brought to the notice of the Deputy Commissioner that the petitioner had contested for the seat reserved for ST (Woman) category. Hence, he is not eligible to contest which will affect the 50% reserved for woman category. Further, show cause notice issued to the Returning Officer to show cause as to why action should not be taken against him for not following the notification issued by the Deputy Commissioner and allowed the petitioner to contest the election. Hence, result of the election has not been announced for the seat for which the petitioner has contested. There is no infirmity or irregularity in the endorsement issued by the 4th respondent. Otherwise, reserving 50% seats to Woman will be defeated. Hence, sought for dismissal of the writ petition.

On earlier occasion, on the clarification sought with regard to Annexure-B produced in the writ petition the Deputy Commissioner by communication dated 23.06.2015 communicated that Annexure-B is not issued from the Office of the Deputy Commissioner. There is no signature or date in the said Notification.

I have carefully considered the arguments addressed by the parties and perused the impugned endorsement and other relevant records.

The records clearly disclose that the Government issued notification for the election of Gram Panchayat in the State. On the basis of the notification the Deputy Commissioner issued Notification on 28.04.2015 fixing reservation of the seats in various Gram Panchayats. So far as the Karekallu Gram Panchayat is concerned, to fill up 17 seats, reservation has been fixed as per the notification issued by the Deputy Commissioner. Out of 17 seats 50% seats were reserved for reserved category and 50% to be filled by general category. Further, out of that 17 seats 50% of the seats have to be filled by the woman category as per the reservation policy of the State Government.

As per the notification, out of 17 seats 9 seats were reserved for general category and 8 seats were reserved for reserved category. Out of the reserved category 50% was reserved to woman. Out of 9 seats reserved for general category 5 seats are reserved for the general woman category and out of 8 seats reserved for reserved category 4 seats were reserved for woman category. As per the notification, out of 4 seats reserved in the woman category 2 seats for SC (Woman) category and 2 seats are ST (Woman) category. Karekallu-1 and Karekallu-3, seats are reserved for SC (Woman) category and Karekallu-1 and Karekallu-5, seats were reserved for ST (Woman) category.

In so far as the reservation to woman in General category out of 5 seats one seat at Karekallu-5 (Tambrahalli) was reserved for General (Woman) category. Out of two seats allotted to Tambrahalli one seat is reserved for ST (Woman) and one seat reserved for Gen (W) category. The Returning Officer accepted the nomination of the petitioner which was reserved for ST (W) category without noticing the notification issued by the Deputy Commissioner. His nomination paper was accepted, symbol was given and allowed to contest the election, counting of the ballet paper was also done. Subsequently, it was noticed by the Returning Officer that two seats in Karekallu-5 (Tambrahalli) village were reserved for woman candidate, one seat for ST (Woman) and one for General (Woman). The petitioner is not eligible to contest and permitting him to contest the election is contrary to law. Accordingly, the endorsement has been issued by the Returning Officer.

Action of the Returning Officer permitting the petitioner to contest the election which was reserved for ST (W) category is contrary to law. If the result of the petitioner is announced it will affect the reservation policy of the State Government. As per the Government Notification dated 30.04.2015 the Government has taken decision to reserve 50% of the seats for woman category. The action of the Returning Officer is contrary to the reservation policy of the State Government. Accordingly, the Deputy Commissioner has taken a decision to conduct fresh election to the Tambrahalli seat which was reserved for ST (W) category.

I find that there is no infirmity or irregularity in the order passed by the Returning Officer withholding the result and also decision taken by the Deputy Commissioner to hold fresh election to the Karekallu-5 (Tambrahalli) village. The election has to be conducted as per the notification issued by the Deputy Commissioner.

Annexure-B produced by the petitioner in the writ petition runs contrary to the notification at Annexure-A issued by the Deputy Commissioner. In the notification issued by Deputy Commissioner it was clearly mentioned that one seat is reserved for ST (W) category and one seat is reserved for Gen. (W) category, in so far as two seats available at Karekallu-5 (Tambrahalli). However, the notification at Annexure-B produced by the petitioner so far as Tambrahalli is concerned one seat was reserved for ST (General) and Gen (W), which runs contrary to the Notification issued by the Deputy Commissioner.

Annexure-B is not issued by the office of the Deputy Commissioner. It does not contain the signature and seal of the Office of the Deputy Commissioner. The election has to be conducted in accordance with the notification issued by the Deputy Commissioner and the reservation policy of the State Government. Hence, the action of Returning Officer cannot be regarded as arbitrary or illegal. Petitioner has not made out a case to interfere with the said notification. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.