In W.A. NO.1112 OF 2021-KAR HC- Mere passing of resolution by Gram Panchayat does not by itself confer right to seek appointment, rules Karnataka HC Justices Alok Aradhe & J.M.Khazi [27-05-2022]

Read Order: SRI. SIDDESHWARA .C S/O SIRIYAPPA Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Tulip Kanth

Bengaluru, June 2, 2022: Observing that a writ of mandamus ensues when there is a legal right and corresponding legal duty, the Karnataka High Court has held that the appellant had failed to prove the infraction of either any legal right or any corresponding legal duty on the respondents to appoint him to the post of Bill Collector.

The Division Bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J.M.Khazi was considering an intra- Court appeal arising out of an order passed by the Single Judge. Facts leading to filing of this appeal were that the appellant claimed that a resolution was passed by Gram Panchayat in his favour, appointing him as a Bill Collector. It was also averred that the aforesaid resolution was approved by the Chief Executive Officer and therefore, the appellant had a right to seek appointment to the post of Bill Collector. 

When the fourth respondent was appointed on the post of Bill Collector in compliance of an order passed by this Court, the appellant filed a writ petition in which a direction was sought to cancel the appointment of the fourth respondent and appoint the appellant to the post of Bill Collector. This petition was dismissed by the Single Judge.Hence, the present appeal was filed. Noting that the appellant had no legal right to claim appointment to the post of Bill Collector, the Bench affirmed, “Mere passing of a resolution by the Gram Panchayat does not by itself confer a person a right to seek appointment.”

The contention that the resolution by which the appellant was sought to be appointed to the post of Bill Collector, had been approved by the Chief Executive Officer under Section 113 of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 was held to be factually incorrect on the ground that the resolution was passed in favour of the appellant on February 17, 2018 whereas the approval said to be accorded by the Chief Executive Officer was granted on August 11, 2017.For these reasons, the appeal was dismissed.