- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53302-DB WA No. 2030 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT APPEAL NO. 2030 OF 2025 (LB-ELE) BETWEEN: SMT PAVITHRA RAVIKUMAR W/O RAVIKUMAR AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS GRAMA PANCHAYATH MEMBER/ PRESENTLY PRESIDENT KANNAMANGALA GRAMA PANCHAYATHI K.R.PURAM HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST BANGALORE 562 067 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. M.K.S. MENON, ADVOCATE A/W SRI. SHIVAPRAKASH M, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYATH RAJ & RURAL DEVELOPMENT GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE- 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT. Digitally signed by VEERENDRA KUMAR K M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53302-DB WA No. 2030 of 2025 KANDAYA BHAVAN, BANGALORE- 560 009. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BANGALORE NORTH SUB DIVISION KANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G.ROAD, BANGALORE-560 009. 4. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER KANNAMANGALA GRAMA PANCHAYATH BIDARAHALLI HOBLI BANGALORE EAST TALUK BANGALORE- 560067. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.S. HARISH, GA FOR R1 TO R3) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS IN WP NO.37319/2025 DATED 11/12/20252, SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN WP NO.37319/2025 DATED 11/12/2025 BY LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE, IN RESPECT OF NOTICE ISSUED U/SECTION 49 OF THE KARNATAKA GRAMA SWARAJ AND PANCHAYATH RAJ ACT, CONSEQUENTLY TO CONDUCT ENQUIRY BEFORE PLACING THE MOTION OF NO-CONFIDENCE. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53302-DB WA No. 2030 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE) 1. The appellant had filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 11.12.2025 [impugned order] passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No.37319/2025 (LB- ELE). 2. The appellant had filed the said writ petition, Inter alia, impugning a notice dated 1.12.2025, which was issued by certain members of the Kannamangala Grama Panchayath for moving a No Confidence Motion against the appellant. Respondent No.3 [Assistant Commissioner, Bangalore North Sub Division], on the basis of the said notice, had called for a meeting to be held on 16.12.2025 and a No Confidence Motion has been moved. 3. A plain reading of the writ petition indicates that the appellant had claimed that she had discharged her duties faithfully and in an unblemished manner. She had also contributed to the generation of surplus. She stated that there is a division of persons in the Grama Panchayath, on the lines of caste and more. She stated that - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53302-DB WA No. 2030 of 2025 repeated attempts have been made to unseat her by certain disgruntled members. 4. In addition, it was also contended on behalf of the appellant before the learned Single Judge that the signatures of the members, who had submitted the notice expressing lack of confidence, were forged. However, the Panchayath Development Officer had verified the same from the extract of the meeting held on 09.08.2023 as well as the extract of the attendance register. Respondent No.5 had also considered the same and was satisfied that the representation was duly submitted by the members and had accordingly, issued a notice fixing the date for the meeting on 16.12.2025. 5. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant has advanced the submissions on the same lines as were noted by the learned Single Judge. He submitted that the appellant's work in the Panchayath has been exemplary and had resulted in generating surplus funds to the extent of over Rs.8.00 Crores [Rupees Eight Crores]. He also contented that the signatures of the members calling for No Confidence Motion have been forged. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53302-DB WA No. 2030 of 2025 6. It is necessary to note that a copy of the representation of the members of the Panchayath made to the Assistant Commissioner, Bangalore North Sub Division, which was signed by 11 members, has been placed on record. According to the appellant, the signatures on the said representation are forged. However, none of the eleven members, who had signed the said representation have come forward to state that their signatures are forged. 7. Sri K.S.Narendra Babu, learned counsel, who is present in Court, states that he represents the eleven members, who had signed the said representation. He states that he has also filed his vakalathnama in the writ petition. He states that he has instructions to state that the signatures on the representation by his clients are not forged. 8. In view of the above, we find no infirmity with the decision of the learned Single Judge in rejecting the writ petition. 9. The question as to how the appellant had performed in her office is not a subject matter in judicial review. It is impermissible for the Court to reject a requisition for a No Confidence Motion by examining the performances of the appellant. Thus, in essence, the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53302-DB WA No. 2030 of 2025 only question to be considered was, whether the signatures on the requisition dated 19.11.2025 were forged. However, as noted above, this Court is unable to readily accept the same. 10. As noted above, the Panchayath Development Officer had verified the same. Respondent No.3 had also examined the said contention and in view of the fact that the counsel representing the said eleven members is present in Court and contends that they have signed the requisition, the allegation that the signatures are forged, is unsubstantial and without any basis. 11. In view of the above, there are no grounds to interfere with the impugned order. The appeal is unmerited and accordingly, dismissed. 12. Pending IAs., if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE ND/List No.: 3 Sl No.: 1