Unregistered Gift Deed Cannot Create Title; Injunction Suit Not Maintainable Without Seeking Declaration If Ownership Is Disputed: Delhi High Court PF Default: General Managers Of Co-op Units Not 'Employers' If Ultimate Control Vests With Federation MD, Kerala High Court Quashes Case BCCI Is Not A 'Public Authority' Under RTI Act; Mere Discharge Of Public Functions Not Enough For Inclusion: CIC Order Framing Charge Under SC/ST Act Is An 'Interlocutory Order', Appeal Under Section 14-A Not Maintainable: Allahabad High Court Electronic Evidence | Nodal Officers Must Be Examined To Prove CDRs; Gait Analysis Inadmissible If Source CCTV Is Corrupted: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Reject Direct Evidence Of Conspiracy On Subjective Notion That It Must Be Hatched In Secrecy: Supreme Court Restores Conviction In Dr. Subbiah Murder Case Waitlisted Candidates Cannot Demand Change Of Posting At Their Whim; Old Select Lists Lapse After Repeal Of Act: Supreme Court NGOs, Individuals Feeding Stray Dogs In Institutional Campuses To Face Tortious Liability For Dog Bites: Supreme Court Stray Dogs Have No Absolute Right To Inhabit Schools, Hospitals Or Restricted Institutional Areas: Supreme Court Bail Jurisdiction Limited To Deciding Release Or Incarceration; High Court Cannot Issue General Directions On Police Accountability: Supreme Court Forest Department Cannot Claim Private Land Without Original Records Or Gazette Notification; Boundaries Prevail Over Area: Sikkim High Court Courts Cannot Be Silent Spectators To Vanishing Of Evidence; Trial Court Must Draw Adverse Inference If Crucial Electronic Records Are Not Produced: Rajasthan High Court Land Acquisition: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Compensation Enhancement By Applying Doctrine Of De-Escalation To Government Policy Rates 2-Day Delay In Lodging FIR Immaterial Once Charge Sheet Is Filed In Motor Accident Cases: Orissa High Court Matrimonial Settlement Enforceable Under Contempt Jurisdiction: Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Wife To Abide By Agreement After Receiving ₹1.5 Crore Prosecution Bound By Statements Of Its Own Witnesses; Absence Of Accused’s Signature On Seizure Memo Justifies Acquittal: Himachal Pradesh HC

Election Process Never Commenced, Stood Frustrated Due to Officer’s Absence: Karnataka High Court on Nalluru Gram Panchayat Dispute

12 August 2025 9:00 PM

By: sayum


“Even if it is presumed that nomination of the petitioner has been submitted, it was never scrutinized and further election process did not take place at all” — Karnataka High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by Smt. Kamala N. Nanjegowda, who sought a declaration that she be treated as the elected President (Adhyaksha) of the Nalluru Gram Panchayat in Devanahalli Taluk after being the sole person to hand in a nomination on the scheduled election day.

Justice M.I. Arun, deciding W.P. No. 22758 of 2025 (LB–RES), upheld the State’s decision to scrap the aborted process of 21 July 2025 and to hold a fresh election on 6 August 2025, observing that “the election process scheduled did not commence at all and the entire process has been frustrated due to action of the Prescribed Election Officer.”

The election was to be conducted under a calendar of events issued on 9 July 2025 by Prescribed Officer Ravindra Singh. Nominations were to be filed between 10:00 a.m. and 10:30 a.m., scrutinised between 10:30 a.m. and 11:00 a.m., followed by withdrawal and polling. But on the appointed day, “without making any alternative arrangements, for personal reasons, the said Ravindra Singh did not attend the Office.”

The petitioner claimed she had lodged her nomination between 10:00 a.m. and 10:30 a.m. with “another Officer who was present in the Office” and argued that, as no other candidate submitted papers, she ought to be declared elected. The Court noted, however, that this official was “not authorized to receive the said nomination” and, crucially, that “no further proceedings in respect of the election process has taken place” thereafter.

It was also undisputed, the Court recorded, that “the impleading applicants… could not submit their nomination papers, as the Prescribed Election Officer was not found.” The State informed the Court that disciplinary proceedings had been initiated against the defaulting officer.

Holding that the mandatory nomination procedure under the panchayat election rules requires submission to the Prescribed Election Officer and scrutiny thereafter, Justice Arun concluded:

“Even if it is presumed that nomination of the petitioner has been submitted, it was never scrutinized and further election process did not take place at all… it has to be held that the election process scheduled did not commence at all.”

Finding “no fault… in the action of the State in deciding to hold fresh election,” the Court dismissed the writ petition. It added a clarification that “any of the eligible contestants including the petitioner are entitled to file nomination for the election to be conducted on 06.08.2025, if they are eligible.”

Date of Decision: 5 August 2025

Latest Legal News