ORDER : 1. These two writ petitions have been filed by Mr. S. Rajendran, Ex-M.L.A and Mr. P. Kodandaramaiah, retired IPS Officer & former Member of Parliament (Lok Sabha), challenging the nomination of the Respondents namely, Mr. V.S. Ugrappa, Mr. K. Abdul Jabbar, Dr. Jayamala Ramachandran, Mr. Ivan D’Souza & Mr. Iqbal Ahmed Saradagi by the Governor to the Karnataka Legislative Council of the State under the provisions of Article 171(5) of the Constitution of India. 2. The petitioners have sought to raise a contention in these two writ petitions that none of these Respondents satisfies the criteria and qualification delineated under Article 171(5) of the Constitution of India. Comparing the previous composition of the Legislative Council in paragraph-5 of W.P.No.32141/2014, the petitioners have given some names along with their cultural and literacy background and have submitted that none of the present Respondents nominated by the Governor of the State under Article 171 of the Constitution of India has such qualifications and merely because of their affiliation of a political party, they have been so nominated to the Legislative Council. The Upper House of the State Legislature, which is suppose to be the Think Tank of the State, therefore, only the persons with such high background of art, culture, social service and literature etc., should be so nominated. 3. On the other hand, Mr. A.G. Shivanna, Addl. Advocate General and other learned counsels appearing for the Respondents have raised a preliminary objection about the maintainability of the present writ petitions referring to Article 163 of the Constitution of India. The learned Addl. A.G. submitted before the Court that it is the discretion of the Governor of the State to nominate the remainder of the member as per Article 171(3) of the Constitution of India, which prescribes the total number of Legislative Council of the State and clause (c) thereof, gives a discretion of the Governor of the State to nominate such number of member as per clause (5), which, in turn stipulates that such persons nominated under clause 3(e) of Article 171 of the Constitution of India, should be the persons having the special knowledge or practical experience in the field of Science, Art, Literature, co-operative movement and social service and therefore, the learned counsels have submitted that the present petitions are not maintainable and deserves to be dismissed at the threshold. 4. 4. The relevant Article 163 and Article 171 of the Constitution of India are quoted below for ready reference:- “163. Council of Ministers to aid and advise Governor – (1) There shall be a council of Ministers with the chief Minister at the head to aid and advise the Governor in the exercise of his functions, except in so far as he is by or under this Constitution required to exercise his functions or any of them in his discretion. (2) If any question arises whether any matter is or is not a matter as respects which the Governor is by or under this Constitution required to act in his discretion, the decision of the Governor in his discretion shall be final, and the validity of anything done by the Governor shall not be called in question on the ground that he ought or ought not to have acted in his discretion. (3) The question whether any, and if so what, advice was tendered by Ministers to the Governor shall not be inquired into in any Court. 171. Composition of the Legislative Councils.- (1) The total number of members in the Legislative Council of a State having such a Council shall not exceed [one-third] of the total number of members in the Legislative Assembly of that State: Provided that the total number of members in the Legislative Council of a State shall in no case be less than forty. (2) Until Parliament by law otherwise provides, the composition of the Legislative Council of a State shall be as provided in clause (3). (2) Until Parliament by law otherwise provides, the composition of the Legislative Council of a State shall be as provided in clause (3). (3) Of the total number of members of the Legislative council of a State – (a) as nearly as may be, one third shall be elected by electorates consisting of members of municipalities, district boards and such other local authorities in the State as Parliament may by law specify; (b) as nearly as may be, one twelfth shall be elected by electorates consisting of persons residing in the State who have been for at least three years graduates of any university in the territory of India or have been for at least three years in possession of qualifications prescribed by or under any law made by Parliament as equivalent to that of a graduate of any such university; (c) as nearly as may be, one twelfth shall be elected by electorates consisting of persons who have been for at least three years engaged in teaching in such educational institutions within the State, not lower in standard than that of a secondary school, as may be prescribed by or under any law made by Parliament; (d) as nearly as may be, one third shall be elected by the members of the Legislative Assembly of the State from amongst persons who are not members of the Assembly; (e) the remainder shall be nominated by the Governor in accordance with the provisions of clause (5). (4) The members to be elected under sub clauses (a), (b) and (c) of clause (3) shall be chosen in such territorial constituencies as may be prescribed by or under any law made by Parliament, and the election under the said sub clauses and under sub clause (d) of the said clause shall be held in accordance with the system of proportional representation by means of the single transferable vote. (5) The members to be nominated by the Governor under sub clause (e) of clause (3) shall consist of persons having special knowledge or practical experience in respect of such matters as the following, namely:- Literature, science, art, co operative movement and social service”. 5. (5) The members to be nominated by the Governor under sub clause (e) of clause (3) shall consist of persons having special knowledge or practical experience in respect of such matters as the following, namely:- Literature, science, art, co operative movement and social service”. 5. Upon perusal of the averments made in the writ petitions as well as the Statement of Objections filed by the Respondents and after a brief hearing of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that the present petitions does not require any interference by this Court and are not even maintainable. 6. Firstly, the jurisdiction to hold any such enquiry into the material available before the Governor while making such nomination is prohibited under Article 163(3) of the Constitution of India. Article 163(2) of the Constitution of India stipulates that it shall be in the discretion of the Governor which shall be final and the validity of anything done by the Governor in this regard shall not be called in question on the ground that he ought or ought not to have acted in his discretion. Sub-clause (3) of Article 163 further prohibits that no Court shall enquire into the advice tendered by Council of Ministers to the Governor for exercise of such discretion, as the Governor is expected to act on the advice of Council of Ministers under the said Article. 7. The allegations and the grounds raised in the present writ petitions that none of the aforesaid nominated members or the Respondents satisfy or comply with the parameters laid in Article 171(3) of the Constitution of India are also essentially vague and bald grounds. 8. A bare perusal of the fields enumerated under Article 171(5) of the Constitution of India would reveal that the fields from which such persons can be picked up are wide and vast enough to include within its ambit, even the persons having their membership, lineage and belonging to even a political party and a member of particular political party is not excluded from the area of fields to be nominated by the Governor under the said Article 171(5) of the Constitution of India. 9. 9. The fields like Literature, Science, Art and cooperative movement and social service are such activities of the Society which the persons of a political party are not only expected to be in, but they may or may not belong to one or more of these fields. Therefore, making any enquiry in the nature of any dissection of these fields is fraught with serious consequence and this kind of enquiry cannot be undertaken by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 10. Therefore, not only there is a bar of jurisdiction contained under Article 163 of the Constitution of India, but the nature of enquiry envisaged in the present petitions also, is simply ruled out by a bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions of Article 163 contained in the Constitution of India. 11. The present writ petitions are nothing but an effort to settle the personal and political scores and which the petitioners have sought to raise before this Court and have sought to invoke the extra jurisdiction of this Court not only for an enquiry in this regard, which is not only constitutionally prohibited but would have led this Court to the unknown terrain and enquire into the scope of limitation of specified fields under Article 171(5) of the Constitution of India, which this Court should advisedly resist from. 12. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present writ petitions are accordingly misconceived and deserves to be dismissed. 13. The writ petitions are accordingly dismissed. No costs.