SMT SANGAMMA W/O LATE RUDRAGOUDA PATIL ALIAS POLICEPATIL vs THE MANAGER
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16824
WP No. 107917 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020200312023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
R
TH
DATED THIS THE 9 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
WRIT PETITION NO.107917 OF 2023 (LB-UC)
BETWEEN:
SMT. SANGAMMA
W/O. LATE RUDRAGOUDA PATIL @ POLICEPATIL,
AGE. 51 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. CHALAGERI, TQ. KUSHTAGI,
DIST. KOPPAL-583281.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. V.S. KALASURMATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE MANAGER,
RAJIV GANDHI VASATI ABHIVRUDHI NIGAMA,
BENGALURU-560001.
2. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
ZILLA PANCHAYAT OFFICE,
KOPPAL-583277.
Digitally signed by
THEJAS KUMAR N
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
COMMISSIONER OFFICE,
KOPPAL-583231.
4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
COMMISSIONER OFFICE,
KOPPAL-583231.
5. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
TALUK PANCHAYAT OFFICE,
KUSHTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583281.
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16824
WP No. 107917 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020200312023
6. THE TAHASILDAR KUSHTAGI,
DIST. KOPPAL-583277.
7. THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
HOLGERA GRAM PANCHAYAT OFFICE,
TQ. HANUMASAGAR HOBALI,
KUSHTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583281.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SHARAD V.MAGADUM, AGA FOR R3, R4 AND R6;
SRI. VIJAYKUMAR BALAGERIMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R5 & R7;
NOTICE TO R1 AND R2 ARE SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO 1.
ISSUES A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING
THE ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.5
¸ÀAvÁ¥ÀAPÀÄ/ªÀ¸Àw/zÀÆgÀÄ/2023-
DATED 06.06.2023 BEARING NO.
24/258
WHICH IS PRODUCED VIDE ANNEXURE-A. 2. TO GRANT
SUCH OTHER RELIEF/S AS DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES
OF THE CASE AND ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION WITH COSTS IN
THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16824
WP No. 107917 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020200312023
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
ORAL ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed seeking following reliefs:
1. Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari
quashing the Endorsement issued by
respondent No.5 dated 06.06.2023 bearing
No.SAMTAPAMKU/ VASATI/DOORU/2023-
24/258 which is produced vide Annexure-A.
2. To grant such other relief/s as deems fit in
the circumstances of the case and allow the
Writ Petition with costs, in the interest of
justice and equity.
2. Heard, Sri.V.S.Kalasurmath, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of Sri.M.V.Hiremath, learned counsel
for the petitioner and Sri.Sharad V.Magadum, learned
Addl. Government Advocate appearing for respondents 3,
4 & 6 and Sri.Vijayakumar Balagerimath, learned counsel
appearing for respondents 5 & 7. Respondent No.1,
though served remained unrepresented.
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16824
WP No. 107917 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020200312023
3. It is the case of the petitioner that, despite
there being an order by the Coordinate Bench of this Court
at the earlier point of time in W.P.No.101242/2023,
disposed of on 22.02.2023, directing the respondents to
address the grievance of the petitioner and consider the
representation dated 22.11.2022 at Annexure-A and pass
appropriate orders in accordance with the law in a time
bound manner, there was no compliance of the order. The
same ended in filing Civil Contempt Petition bearing CCC
No.100195/2023, which came to be dropped in view of an
affidavit filed by accused No.7 PDO, Holgera Gram
Panchayat, along with an endorsement stating that the
order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ
Petition has been complied with. However, liberty was
reserved to the petitioner herein to challenge the said
endorsement.
4. The photocopy of the impugned endorsement
dated 06.06.2023, is extracted hereunder, for easy
reference.
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16824
WP No. 107917 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020200312023
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16824
WP No. 107917 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020200312023
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16824
WP No. 107917 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020200312023
5. A perusal of the endorsement dated
06.06.2023, clearly states that there is complete non-
application of mind by the concerned officer. The entire
order came to be passed on the opinion given by the panel
counsel/ advocate of the Taluk Panchayat.
6. It is trite law that, no administrative or
statutory authorities can pass orders blindly or solely
based on the opinion of the panel counsel/ advocate. As
per the well established principles of administrative law
and several landmark Judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court, and this Court, the authorities must independently
apply their mind and ensure that their decisions are in
conformity with the law of the land including the binding
judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India under
Article 141 of the Constitution of India.
7. It is further trite law that, when a statute
confers a power on the authority to pass an order, that
discretion and power must be exercised by the said
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16824
WP No. 107917 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020200312023
authority personally and objectively, by that authority
alone. The opinions expressed by the panel counsel/
advocate are just advisory in nature and a mean to guide
the authority and cannot be a basis or the only reason for
the decision. In other words, it cannot replace the decision
making process of the competent officer.
8. The reason for application of mind by the
authority in respect of case, on the basis of facts and
circumstances, is based on the principle that a discretion is
vested with the authority to pass orders and the said
discretion in law demands application of mind in respect of
a case before it and if the same lacks and entirely based
on the opinion of somebody else, the decision taken by the
authority would be without jurisdiction, because it has not
exercised its discretion in accordance with the law.
9. If an authority blindly copies or signs off the
order only on the legal opinion, without examining the
facts and relevant law by itself, it amounts to an
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16824
WP No. 107917 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020200312023
abdication of statutory power and acting under dictation.
Such orders require to be held as arbitrary, invalid and
lacking jurisdiction. The authorities are bound under law to
consider the facts and circumstances of the case on the
basis of law applicable to the same and pass orders in
terms of law, within the permissible discretion granted in
law, as the legal responsibility and statutory duty to pass a
reasoned, independent and lawful order solely rests on the
shoulders of the deciding authority.
10. All more, the reasons are the heartbeat and
soul of the order. In the absence of reasons, the order is
just a bunch of dead words, without having any meaning
in law. This view of the Court gains strength from the
Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of
BASUDEV DUTTA VS. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL &
1
OTHERS
, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court at
Paragraph No.12.6, has held as under:
1
CIVIL APPEAL No.13919/2024, decided on 05.12.2024
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16824
WP No. 107917 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020200312023
“12.6 It is manifestly clear from the
above judgments that reasons are heartbeat
of every order and every notice must specify
the grounds on which the administrative or
quasi-judicial authority intends to proceed; if
any document is relied upon to form the basis
of enquiry, such document must be furnished
to the employee; it is only then a meaningful
reply can be furnished; and the failure to
furnish the documents referred and relied in
the notice would vitiate the entire proceedings
as being arbitrary and in violation of the
principles of natural justice; and before taking
any adverse decision, the aggrieved person
must be given an opportunity of personal
hearing. In the light of the same, we have no
hesitation to hold that the order of termination
passed against the appellant is arbitrary,
illegal and violative of the principles of natural
justice and it cannot be sustained.”
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16824
WP No. 107917 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020200312023
11. Reverting to the case on hand, as stated afore,
the Officer has not at all applied his mind in terms of law
as per the provisions of Karnataka Gram Swaraj and
Panchayat Raj Act, 1993. It appears, the order came to be
passed in a haste, only to absolve themselves from the
contempt proceedings and to save their skin. These kinds
of endorsements amount to aggravated form of contempt.
12. Be that as it may. In view of the dropping of
the Contempt proceedings, the order passed by the
concerned Officer is quashed. The matter stands
remanded for consideration of the representation in
accordance with the law, in terms of the order passed by
the Coordinate Bench of this Court in
W.P.No.101242/2023, disposed of on 22.02.2023.
13. The concerned Zilla Panchayat is directed to
assign the consideration of the petitioner’s representation
to any other officer, other than the officer who has passed
the impugned order, if the said officer is continuing in the
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16824
WP No. 107917 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020200312023
said office. In the event he is transferred, the same shall
be assigned to the person who is presently holding the
post. The entire exercise shall be contemplated within
eight weeks from today.
14. It is made clear that the order shall be passed
in accordance with the law and not on the advice of the
panel counsel/ advocate. The opinions are advisory in
nature and cannot be the basis for passing the order.
15. All the contentions of the parties are left open.
The compliance report shall be filed before this Court,
immediately after expire of eight months.
16. Registry to send a copy of this order to the Prl.
Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj
Department, so also to the Chief Secretary, Government
of Karnataka, for issuing proper guidelines to the
concerned officers to pass orders by applying their mind,
in terms of the law and not on the opinion of the panel
counsel/ advocate.
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16824
WP No. 107917 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020200312023
17. With the above observations, the Writ Petition
allowed and remanded
is .
SD/-
(T.M.NADAF)
JUDGE
TKN
CT: UMD
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 10