- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2532-DB WA No. 200049 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K NATARAJAN AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT APPEAL NO.200049 OF 2025 (CS-EL/M) BETWEEN: SRI. SANTHOSH G. CHANAGONDA S/O SRI. GURANNA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/O. INGALAGI VILLAGE, SINDAGI TALUKA, DIST. BIJAPUR (VIJAYAPURA). STATE KARNATAKA-586 128 PRESIDENT OF HARANAL VILLAGE PANCHAYATH, DEVARAHIPPARAGI TALUK, VIJAYAPURA DISTRICT. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. S. S. MAMADAPUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, M. S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DC FFICE, VIJAYAPURA-586 101 Digitally signed by NIJAMUDDIN JAMKHANDI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2532-DB WA No. 200049 of 2025 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, IND SUB-DIVISION, IND TALUK, VIJAYAPURA DISTRICT. 4. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, (PDO) HARANAL (PA) VILLAGE PANCHAYATH, SINDAGI TALUK, VIJAYAPURA DISTRICT 5. SHIVANAND CHANABASAPPA YATAGERI AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O HARNAL TQ. DEVAR HIPPARGI DIST. VIJAYAPUR 6. DUNDAMMA W/O PRABHUGOUDA HADNUR, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE, R/O HARNAL TQ. DEVAR HIPPARGI DIST. VIJAYAPUR 7. VIJAYALAXMI S. BIRADAR AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE, R/O HARNAL TQ. DEVAR HIPPARGI DIST. VIJAYAPUR 8. SIDAPPA S/O PARAMAPPA HIREKURBAR, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O HARNAL TQ. DEVAR HIPPARGI DIST. VIJAYAPUR 9. SUSHMA W/O NANDAPPA SARWAD, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE, R/O HARNAL TQ. DEVAR HIPPARGI DIST. VIJAYAPUR 10. BHIMAPPA S/O ERAPPA BHANDARI,, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O HARNAL, TQ. DEVAR HIPPARGI DIST. VIJAYAPUR - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2532-DB WA No. 200049 of 2025 11. SURESH S/O RAMANNGOUDA AMBALANUR, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O INGALAGI TQ. DEVAR HIPPARGI DIST. VIJAYAPUR 12. SUJNANI W/O MALAPPA PUJARI, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O INGALAGI TQ. DEVAR HIPPARGI 13. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TALUKA PANCHAYAT, DEVARHIPPARGI -586115 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY, GA FOR R/A-1 TO 3; SMT. RATNA N. SHIVAYOGIMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R-4 AND R-13; SRI. HULEPPA HEROOR, ADVOCATE FOR R-5 TO R-12) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED HON’BLE COURT ORDER DATED 05-02-2025 IN WP NO. 203931/2024. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K NATARAJAN AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2532-DB WA No. 200049 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) This intra-court appeal is filed challenging the order of learned Single Judge of this Court dated 05.02.2025 in WP No.203931/2024. 2. Learned Single Judge after considering the rival submissions has dismissed the writ petition. 3. Sri. S. S. Mamadapur, learned counsel for the appellant submits that there is a violation of the mandate of law by not giving 15 days notice, which is required for no confidence motion. He submits that on 06.12.2024, some members of the Gram Panchayat have submitted a requisition of no confidence motion to the Assistant Commissioner. The Assistant Commissioner on 17.12.2024 has issued notice of no confidence motion, indicating the date of meeting as 03.01.2025 and such notice, was served upon the appellant on 19.12.2024, which is less than 15 days. This aspect has not been considered by learned Single Judge and the writ petition is dismissed. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2532-DB WA No. 200049 of 2025 4. Per contra, Sri. Mallikarjun C Basareddy, learned Government Advocate, Smt. Ratna N Shivayogimath and Sri. Huleppa Herror, learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondents in chorus submits that there was no interim order by the learned Single Judge in the writ petition and thereafter, no confidence was held on 03.01.2025, wherein the appellant, who was the Adhyakshya of the Gram Panchayat has been removed from the post and the appropriate remedy is to challenge the same before the appropriate forum. 5. We have heard the arguments of both sides and perused the materials available on record. 6. The contention with regard to non service of notice by providing 15 days time need not be gone into in the present case for the simple reason that no confidence meeting was held on 03.01.2025 and the appellant has failed to prove the confidence by majority and he has been - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2532-DB WA No. 200049 of 2025 removed as Adhyakshya of the Gram Panchayat and the proceedings were drawn. 7. In view of the subsequent development, we are of the considered view that the issue with regard to non compliance of requirement of Section 3 of Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Motion of No-Confidence Against Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Grama Panchayat) Rules, 1994, need not be gone into. It is always open for the appellant to challenge the decision of no confidence motion dated 03.01.2025 in accordance with law. 8. Accordingly, the writ appeal is disposed off. Sd/- (K NATARAJAN) JUDGE Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) NJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16 CT:SI