Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 893 (KAR)

Lokesh v. Nayaka VS State of Karnataka

2013-08-08

L.NARAYANA SWAMY

body2013
JUDGMENT 1. The petitioners herein challenge the notification dated 8.2.2013 in which office of the Deputy Mayor has been reserved as per notification dated 17.2.2011 in favour of B.C.A. Hence they sought direction to the respondents to reserve the said office of Deputy Mayor in BBMP in favour of Scheduled Tribe. 2. The petitioners state that they are the persons elected to the Council of BBMP belonging to Scheduled Tribe Nayaka community and they claim reservation for consideration of their case to the office of Deputy Mayor under Scheduled Tribe category. Section 10(1)(A) of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 and Karnataka Municipal Corporations (Election) Rules govern the reservations to the offices of Mayor and Deputy Mayor. As per Rule 73-A(2), if reservation to be worked out to any category, the population of that category must be more than 0.5%. The population of Scheduled Tribe is more than 0.5% and accordingly reservation has been made to that category. As per the notification dated 23.1.2008, the population of Scheduled Tribe has been arrived at on the basis of 2001 census which came to 6.6%. Accordingly, one post has been reserved in their favour. Since the reservation further provides that one-third post is to be reserved in favour of woman, accordingly said one post was reserved in favour of Scheduled Tribe woman. Since 1986 the State Government has not reserved even one seat to the Scheduled Tribe in respect of Mayor or Deputy Mayor of BBMP. On all the previous 13 terms, elections have been held and no attempt has been made to reserve a single post in favour of ST. Hence the impugned action is contrary to law. Reservation further provides that roster has to be operated on the basis of rotation. The Rules provides that reservation has to be made by first listing out all the corporations alphabetically and reservation and rotation to be applied in a descending order. In that order, Bellary got higher percentage of population of 8.89%, second Davangere with 5.99%, third Mysore with 3.67%, 4th Hubli-Dharwad with 3.06%, Belgaum with 2.41% and next to it is Bangalore with 1.20%. In that order, Bellary got higher percentage of population of 8.89%, second Davangere with 5.99%, third Mysore with 3.67%, 4th Hubli-Dharwad with 3.06%, Belgaum with 2.41% and next to it is Bangalore with 1.20%. The Respondent State Government as it has already reserved one post in favour of Scheduled Tribe (W) and the rotation of reservation has to be made alphabetically and if this is followed, this time the said post of Deputy Mayor of BBMP should have been reserved in favour of Scheduled Tribe. The reservations were made to Mysore Corporation for the 11th term, Hubli-Dharwad 15th term, Davangere 13th term, Bellary 12th term, Tumkur 14th term. Hence the learned counsel submits that the order passed by the Government reserving office of Deputy Mayor in favour of B.C.A is contrary to law, the same has to be set aside and direction to be issued to the Government to reserve it in favour of Scheduled Tribe. 3. The respondents filed statement of objections. It is submitted that the notifications have been issued strictly by following the provisions of the Act and the Rules and notification dated 23.1.2008. As per Section 10(1)(A) of the Act, the Corporations have been listed out alphabetically and arranged in a descending order based on the population and reservations have been provided to the Scheduled Tribe(W) on the basis of its order. By following rotation, it has not reached Bangalore and it may come in the next term for which it is for the Government to pass appropriate order. 4. I have heard the respective counsels, Senior Counsels for both the parties. The Senior Counsel for the respondent No.4 is also heard. 5. From the 10th term onwards, reservation in favour of Scheduled Tribe has been implemented since population reached more than 0.5%. The office of Mayor was reserved in favour of Scheduled Tribe for the 10th term and for the 9th term, office of Mayor of Davangere Corporation was reserved. To the office of Deputy Mayor, again for the 11th term, it was reserved in favour of Scheduled Tribe (W) in Mysore City Corporation and Bellary was reserved for 12th term for the Scheduled Tribe (W). Davangere was reserved for 13th term and 10th term. If this is considered, reservation in favour of Scheduled Tribe has been utilized to Mysore, Davangere & Bellary. Davangere was reserved for 13th term and 10th term. If this is considered, reservation in favour of Scheduled Tribe has been utilized to Mysore, Davangere & Bellary. For 14th term, Tumkur Corporation was considered and office of Deputy Mayor was reserved in favour of ST (W). Since Tumkur Corporation notification was quashed, the said reservation was not utilized. For the 15th term, Deputy Mayor in respect of Hubli-Dharwad was reserved for ST. Hence four corporations were not given reservations namely, Belgaum, Bangalore, Gulbarga and Mangalore. In the order of rotation in descending order, Belgaum comes first since it has got 2.41% population. Thereafter it is only Bangalore which has 1.20% of population, Gulbarga has 1.07% of population and Mangalore has 0.99% of population. In view of the above, on the basis of percentage of population, reservation has to be made in favour of Scheduled Tribe in respect of Belgaum and Bangalore. But so far as Belgaum is concerned, it is having 15th term of office. Hence only one office that is left to be reserved that is, Bangalore. Accordingly, this term, office of Deputy Mayor has to be considered in favour of Scheduled Tribe in respect of BBMP. This aspect of the matter the Government has failed to take into consideration while issuing the modifying notification. 6. As it is discussed earlier, for the present term, there cannot be reservation in favour of Belgaum since 15th term is already going on. Under these circumstances, as per the provisions of the Act and Rules relating to reservation on rotation, this time it has to be considered in favour of ST (W) so far as BBMP is concerned. 7. In that view of the matter, the impugned notification dated 8.2.2013 so far as reservation to office of Deputy Mayor in BBMP is concerned, is liable to be quashed and the Government is to be directed to pass appropriate order in this regard. 8. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed. Impugned notification dated 8.2.2013 in NO.UDD 32 MLR 2013 Bangalore produced at Annexure-A is hereby quashed so far as it relates to reservation of office of Deputy Mayor in favour of BCA. The first respondent Government is directed to issue appropriate order in this regard.