- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28183 WP No. 21528 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 21528 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: MR. BAPU GIRISH S/O. THIMMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/A. KAREHALLI VILLAGE, HULIYAR HOBLI, CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572135. ADHYAKSHA OF GANADALU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, TUMAKURU. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SIDDHARTH B. MUCHANDI., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYATH RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, TIPTURU SUB DIVISION, TIPTURU, TUMAKURU 572201. 3. GANADALU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK, GANADALU VILLAGE, TUMAKURU - 572218. REPRESENTED BY ITS PDO. Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28183 WP No. 21528 of 2025 4. MR. SREENIVAS G S AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER OCC. MEMBER 5. MR. SHIVAKUMAR G K AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER OCC. MEMBER 6. MRS. POORNIMA K., AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER OCC. MEMBER 7. MR. M H VEERABHADRAIAH., AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER OCC. MEMBER 8. MR. S R SHIVANNA, AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER OCC. MEMBER 9. MRS. MEENAKSHI AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER 10. MR. MANJI BAI AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER OCC. MEMBER 11. MRS. BHIBI FATHIMA AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER OCC. MEMBER 12. MRS. P D GOWRAMMA AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER OCC. MEMBER 13. MRS. H C YASHODHA AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER OCC. MEMBER 14. MR. JAYAPRAKASH AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER OCC. MEMBER - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28183 WP No. 21528 of 2025 15. MRS. LATHA MANI AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER OCC. MEMBER 16. MR. PRAKASH K G., AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER OCC. MEMBER 17. MR. M K MANJULA AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER OCC. MEMBER 18. MR. G K HIMAYUN PASHA AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER OCC. MEMBER 19. MR. MANJUNATH L AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER OCC. MEMBER 20. MRS. AFREEN BANU AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER OCC. MEMBER RESPONDENTS 4 TO 20 ARE MEMBERS OF GANADALU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK, GANADALU VILLAGE, TUMAKURU - 572218. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.H.K.KENCHEGOWDA., AGA FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE DATED 05/07/2025 (ANNEXURE-D) ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 AND PASS ANY SUCH ORDER OR DIRECTION AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28183 WP No. 21528 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed by the Adhyaksha of Ganadalu Gram Panchayat, Chikkanayakanahalli Taluk, Tumakuru District, assailing the legality and validity of the notice dated 05.07.2025 issued by the 2nd respondent– Assistant Commissioner under Rule 3(2) of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Motion of No Confidence against Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Grama Panchayat) Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as 'the KPR Rules, 1994'). By the said notice, a meeting has been convened for consideration of a motion of no confidence against the petitioner, scheduled to be held on 29.07.2025. 2. The petitioner challenges the impugned notice primarily on the ground that the initiation of the motion of no confidence by the members of the Gram Panchayat is in contravention of the mandatory requirements prescribed under Section 49(2) of the Karnataka Grama - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28183 WP No. 21528 of 2025 Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act, 1993’), thereby rendering the entire proceedings vitiated. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents. Perused the records made available. 4. The primary ground urged by the petitioner in assailing the impugned notice namely, that it violates the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 49 of the Karnataka Grama Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 is found to be wholly misconceived and untenable. A plain reading of the petition indicates that the petitioner has overlooked a crucial statutory development: sub-section (2) of Section 49 of the Act, 1993, was expressly omitted by Act No.44 of 2015 with effect from 25.02.2016. As such, reliance placed on a repealed provision cannot form the basis for invalidating the impugned notice. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28183 WP No. 21528 of 2025 5. Upon perusal of the record, it is evident that the requisition submitted by the members of the Gram Panchayat does not contain any specific allegations of misconduct or misfeasance. Rather, the members have expressed their lack of confidence in the leadership of the petitioner–Adhyaksha and have sought to move a motion of no confidence on that basis. Such a requisition clearly falls within the ambit of Section 49(1) of the Act, 1993, which permits members to express want of confidence in the Adhyaksha and seek convening of a meeting for consideration of a no confidence motion. 6. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that the initiation of proceedings by the members of the Panchayat is in consonance with the statutory framework currently in force and cannot be faulted. The impugned notice dated 05.07.2025 issued by the 2nd respondent–Assistant Commissioner is thus legally sustainable and does not call for any interference under - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28183 WP No. 21528 of 2025 Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as being devoid of merit. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE DL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10