- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10915 WP No. 106230 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 106230 OF 2025 (LB-ELE) BETWEEN: SMT SUMITRA W/O. PARAPPA KULAGOD, AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: PRESIDENT OF MAIGUR GRAM PANCHAYAT, R/O: SHIRAGUPPI, TQ: JAMAKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOT – 587 119. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.L. MATTI., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. 2. 3. 4. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYAT RAJ, M. S. BUILDING, 3RD FLOOR, 3RD GATE , BENGALURU – 560 001, R/BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER JAMAKHANDI DIVISION JAMAKHANDI-587301. THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, MAIGUR GRAMA PANCHAYITA, MAIGUR TQ: JAMAKHANDI-587119 SRI. SACHIN S/O TAMMANNA SHINGE, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: ELECTED MEMBER OF GRAM PANCHAYAT, MAIGUR, R/O: MAIGUR, TQ: JAMAKHANDI-587119. R Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10915 WP No. 106230 of 2025 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. SRI. SANGAPPA S/O CHANNAPPA PIDASHETTY, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: ELECTED MEMBER OF GRAM PANCHAYAT, MAIGUR, R/O: MAIGUR, TQ: JAMAKHANDI-587119. SMT. TAYAVVA W/O ANNASAB SANGODI AGE: 45 YEARS OCC: ELECTED MEMBER OF GRAM PANCHAYAT, MAIGUR, R/O: MAIGUR, TQ: JAMAKHANDI-587119. SHRI. RAMAPPA S/O SIDDAPPA AMBI, AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: ELECTED MEMBER OF GRAM PANCHAYAT, MAIGUR, R/O: MAIGUR, TQ: JAMAKHANDI-587119. SMT. ANNAPURANNA W/O MALLAPPA B. PATIL., AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: ELECTED MEMBER OF GRAM PANCHAYAT, MAIGUR, R/O: MAIGUR, TQ: JAMAKHANDI-587119. SHRI HANUMANT S/O SADASHIV GUBBI, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: ELECTED MEMBER OF GRAM PANCHAYAT, MAIGUR, R/O: MAIGUR, TQ: JAMAKHANDI-587119. SMT. GEETA W/O PARASAPPA AMBI AGE: 50 YEARS OCC: ELECTED MEMBER OF - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10915 WP No. 106230 of 2025 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. GRAM PANCHAYAT, MAIGUR, R/O: MAIGUR, TQ: JAMAKHANDI-587119. SMT. VIMALA W/O ALLAYYA MATHAPATI, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: ELECTED MEMBER OF GRAM PANCHAYAT, MAIGUR, R/O: MAIGUR, TQ: JAMAKHANDI-587119. SRI. BASAGONDA S/O MAHADEV PATIL, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: ELECTED MEMBER OF GRAM PANCHAYAT, MAIGUR, R/O: SHIRAGUPPI, TQ: JAMAKHANDI-587119. SRI. SHIVAPPA S/O DHAREYAPPA NYAMGOUDA AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: ELECTED MEMBER OF GRAM PANCHAYAT, MAIGUR, R/O: SHIRAGUPPI, TQ: JAMAKHANDI-587119. SRI. HANAMANTHA S/O SADASHIVA BIRADAR, AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: ELECTED MEMBER OF GRAM PANCHAYAT, MAIGUR, R/O: SHIRAGUPPI, TQ: JAMAKHANDI-587119. SMT. SHANTAVVA W/O MALLAPPA MANTUR, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: ELECTED MEMBER OF GRAM PANCHAYAT, MAIGUR, R/O: SHIRAGUPPI, TQ: JAMAKHANDI-587119. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10915 WP No. 106230 of 2025 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. SMT. SHWETA W/O PRAKASH AINAPUR AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: ELECTED MEMBER OF GRAM PANCHAYAT, MAIGUR, R/O: SHIRAGUPPI, TQ: JAMAKHANDI-587119. SRI. KALLAPPA S/O HANAMAPPA NYAMGOUDA, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: ELECTED MEMBER OF GRAM PANCHAYAT, MAIGUR, R/O: SHIRAGUPPI, TQ: JAMAKHANDI-587119. SMT. GEETA W/O BASAVARAJ MANTUR, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: ELECTED MEMBER OF GRAM PANCHAYAT, MAIGUR, R/O: SHIRAGUPPI, TQ: JAMAKHANDI-587119. SMT. SUWARNA W/O APPASAB HARIJAN, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: ELECTED MEMBER OF GRAM PANCHAYAT, MAIGUR, R/O: SHIRAGUPPI, TQ: JAMAKHANDI-587119. SRI. KALASAPPA S/O BHIMAPA KALE AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: ELECTED MEMBER OF GRAM PANCHAYAT, MAIGUR, R/O: SHIRAGUPPI, TQ: JAMAKHANDI-587119. SMT. SAVITHRI W/O SHIVAPPA SANKARATTI, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: ELECTED MEMBER OF - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10915 WP No. 106230 of 2025 22. GRAM PANCHAYAT, MAIGUR, R/O: SHIRAGUPPI, TQ: JAMAKHANDI-587119. SHIR HANUMANT S/O NAGAPPA PATIL, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: ELECTED MEMBER OF GRAM PANCHAYAT, MAIGUR, R/O: SHIRAGUPPI, TQ: JAMAKHANDI-587119. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAMESH B. CHIGARI., AGA FOR R1 & R2; SRI. PRASHANT S. KADADEVAR., ADVOCATE FOR C/R4 AND R7; NOTICE TO R3, R5, R6 AND R8 TO R22) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF NATURE OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING AN IMPUGNED NOTICE IN FORM.NO.II BEARING.NO.CHUNAVANE/E-710302/2025 DATED 13/08/2025 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER WHICH HAS BEEN SERVED UPON THE PETITIONER ON 18/08/2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-C, ON BASIS OF FORM NO.I ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN ISSUED BY RESPONDENTS NO.2 TO 22 VIDE ANNEXURE-B ON 13/08/2025 IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10915 WP No. 106230 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. Learned AGA accepts notice for respondents No.1 and 2. Sri.Prashant S.Kadadevar, learned counsel accepts notice for respondents No.4 and 7. Notice to respondents No.3, 5, 6 and 8 to 22 is dispensed with in view of the proposed order to be passed. 2. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a. Issue a writ of certiorari by quashing an impugned Notice in Form No.II bearing No. Chunavane/E- 710302/2025 dated 13.08.2025 issued by R2 Assistant Commissioner which has been served upon the petitioner on 18.08.2025 vide Annexure-C, on basis of Form No.1 alleged to have been issued by Respondents 2 to 22 vide Annexure-B on 13.08.2025 in the ends of justice and equity. b. Any other reliefs deems fit be awarded. 3. The petitioner is the president of the Maigur Grama Panchayat, elected in the second term vide resolution dated 31.07.2023. Petitioner claims to have discharged her duties in a proper manner. When a no - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10915 WP No. 106230 of 2025 confidence motion had been earlier moved, which came to be challenged in W.P. No.104153/2025, the writ petition came to be allowed on the ground that 15 days clear notice has not been furnished. 4. It is thereafter that another no confidence motion had been moved against the petitioner on 13.08.2025 by 19 members of the panchayat, in furtherance of which the Asst. Commissioner issued a notice fixing the date of holding the meeting to consider the no confidence motion on 2.09.2025 at 11 a.m. in the gram panchayat office. It is challenging the same, the petitioner is before this Court. 5. Sri.S.L.Matti, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there is clear and categorical violation of Subrule (1) of Rule 3 of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Motion of No confidence against Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Grama Panchayat) Rules, 1994 [‘Rules of 1994’ for short] inasmuch as two members had to present the motion for no confidence - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10915 WP No. 106230 of 2025 to the Assistant Commissioner. From a reading of the motion which has been submitted in terms of Form-1 at Annexure-B, it is not clear as to which of the two members had submitted the said motion. Even application filed to the Assistant Commissioner calling upon the Assistant Commissioner to furnish details as to who had submitted the no confidence motion has not yielded any results and, in that background, he submits that there being a violation of Subrule (1) of Rule 3 of the Rules of 1994, the meeting cannot proceed with. 6. There is no clear and categorical endorsement in the motion moved at Annexure-B as to who has presented it and from whom it has been received by the Assistant Commissioner and also that there is no seal of the Assistant Commissioner. 7. Heard Sri.S.L.Matti, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.Ramesh B. Chigari, learned AGA for respondents - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10915 WP No. 106230 of 2025 No.1 and 2 and Sri.Prashant S.Kadadevar, learned counsel for respondents No.4 and 7. Perused papers. 8. Subrule (1) of Rule 3 of the Rules of 1994 is reproduced hereunder for easy reference: 3. Motion of No-confidence:- (1) A written notice of intention to make the motion under the proviso to Section 49 shall be in Form I signed by not less than specified in Section 49(1) of the total number of members together with a copy of the proposed motion shall be delivered in person specified under sub-section (2) of Section 49, the allied particular allegations with notice enlisted in written witnesses and evidences submitted in person by any two of the members signing the notice to the Assistant Commissioner. 9. 9. A perusal of the said Rule would indicate that a written notice of intention to make the motion under the proviso to Section 49 shall be in Form-1, signed by not less than that specified in Subsection (1) of Section 49 of the total number of members together with a copy of the proposed motion and shall be delivered in person by any two of the members signing the notice to the Assistant Commissioner. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10915 WP No. 106230 of 2025 10. What is required therefore is that the requirement under Subsection (1) Section 49 of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayati Raj Act 1993, is required to be complied with in terms of number of persons who are signing it. In terms of the first proviso to Subsection (1) of Section 49, no such resolution shall be moved unless notice of resolution signed by not less than one half of the total number of members and at least 10 days’ notice has been given with intention to move the resolution. 11. On enquiry, learned counsel for the petitioner submits the total number of members of the Maigur Grama panchayat are 21. If that be so, perusal of Annexure-B indicates that 19 of them have signed, i.e., to say except for the president and vice president, all the members of the gram panchayat have signed the no confidence motion. 12. What is required under Subrule (1) of Rule 3 is that one half of the total number of members have to sign - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10915 WP No. 106230 of 2025 the copy of the proposed motion and it shall be delivered in person by any two of the members signing the notice to the Assistant Commissioner. It is not required that a separate covering letter is enclosed along with the motion, any two of the members who have signed a no confidence motion could deliver the same to the Assistant Commissioner. In the present case, 19 members having signed (though learned counsel for the petitioner contends that all those 19 members have not personally signed) and the same has been submitted to the Assistant Commissioner. 13. One other submission of Sri.S.L.Matti, is that it is not clear from Annexure-B as to whether it is the Assistant Commissioner who has received it. A perusal of signature in Annexure-B compared to the signature in Annexure-C being notice issued by the Assistant Commissioner indicates that the signature found on the said notice and the signature of the receiving person is one and the same. Therefore, it is clear that - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10915 WP No. 106230 of 2025 the requisition notice has been received by the Assistant Commissioner even though there is no rubber stamp/seal affixed by the Assistant Commissioner office in that regard. 14. In that view of the matter, I do not find any infirmity in the notice which has been issued by the Assistant Commissioner fixing the meeting on 2.09.2025, 19 persons having allegedly signed, whether they have, in fact, signed would have to be ascertained in the course of the meeting to be conducted on 2.09.2025. 15. Insofar the last submission of Sri.S.L.Matti, that the request made by the petitioner for letting the petitioner know as to who submitted the requisition notice, in my considered opinion, would not be relevant for the matter so long as the requirement under Subsection (1) of Section 49 has been satisfied and one half of the members have submitted the requisition. - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10915 WP No. 106230 of 2025 16. There being no infirmity, with the above observation, the petition stands dismissed at the admission stage. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE LN List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1