RAVINDRAPPA S/O UJJAPPA MUDIYAPPANAVAR, vs THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16759
WP No. 109276 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020252042025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
TH
DATED THIS THE 8 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
WRIT PETITION NO.109276 OF 2025 (LB-ELE)
BETWEEN:
1. RAVINDRAPPA S/O. UJJAPPA MUDIYAPPANAVAR,
AGE. 62 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. SHIVA PETROL BUNK NEAR RATTIHATTI,
DIST. HAVERI-581116.
2. SHIVAKUMAR S/O. DEVENDRAPPA UPPAR,
AGE. 48 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. KOTE RASTE, UPPAR ONI, RATTIHALLI,
DIST HAVERI-581116.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. JAYANT RAMACHANDRA ITAGI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLEX,
DEVAGIRI ROAD, DEVAGIRI, DIST. HAVERI-581 110.
Digitally signed by
THEJAS KUMAR N
Location: High
Court of Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench
2. SANJEEV @ SANJEEVKUMAR
S/O. MUDIGOWDA PATIL @ NIRALGI,
AGE. 56 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. BASAVESHWAR NAGAR, “B” BLOCK,
TH
16 CROSS, DIST. HAVERI-581 110.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. SUNITHA J.SEQUEIRA, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. SHIVARAJ P.MUDHOL, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE 1) A WRIT OF
CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 01.12.2025
BEARING NO.CHUNAVANE/VAHI:2025-2026 PASSED BY
RESPONDENT NO.1/ DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HAVERI VIDE
ANNEXURE-A DISQUALIFYING THE PETITIONERS NO.1 AND 2, IN
THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. 2) A WRIT OF MANDAMUS,
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16759
WP No. 109276 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020252042025
THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 01/12/2025 BEARING
NO.CHUNAVANE/VAHI:2025-2026 DISQUALIFYING THE
PETITIONERS NO.1 AND 2 VIDE ANNEXURE-A IS ILLEGAL, NON-
EXISTENT/NON EST AND INVALID, THEREBY DIRECTING THE
RESPONDENT NO.1/DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HAVERI TO RE-
INSTATE THE PETITIONERS NO.1 AND 2 PRESIDENT AND VICE-
PRESIDENT OF RATTIHALLI PATTANA PANCHAYAT AND RESTORE THE
STATUS OF RATTIHALLI PATTANA PANCHAYAT TO ITS ORIGINAL
POSITION PRIOR TO 01/12/2025. 3) A WRIT OF MANDAMUS,
DIRECTIONS, WRIT OR ANY ORDERS TO THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO
4 AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE FACTS AND
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS STATED ABOVE, WITH COSTS IN
THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
ORAL ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed seeking following reliefs:
1) A writ of Certiorari quashing the impugned
order dated 01.12.2025 bearing
No.Chunavane/Vahi:2025-2026 passed by
respondent no.1/ Deputy Commissioner,
Haveri vide Annexure-A disqualifying the
Petitioner Nos.1 and 2, in the interest of
justice and equity.
2) A writ of Mandamus, that the impugned order
dated 01/12/2025 bearing
No.Chunavane/Vahi:2025-2026 disqualifying
the Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 vide Annexure-A is
illegal, non-existent/non-est and invalid,
thereby directing respondent no.1/Deputy
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16759
WP No. 109276 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020252042025
Commissioner, Haveri to re-instate the
petitioner Nos.1 and 2 President and Vice-
president of Rattihalli Pattana Panchayat and
restore the status of Rattihalli Pattana
Panchayat to its original position prior to
01/12/2025.
3) A writ of Mandamus, directions, writ or any
orders to Respondent Nos.1 to 4 as this
Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and
circumstances of the case as stated above,
with costs in the interest of justice and
equity.
2. Heard, Sri.Jayant Ramachandra Itagi, learned
counsel appearing for the petitioners, Smt.Sunitha
J.Sequeira, learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing
for respondent No.1 and Sri.Shivaraj P.Mudhol, learned
counsel appearing for respondent No.2.
3. The facts that are not in dispute are as under:
3.1 In an election scheduled on 17.08.2025, the
petitioners were elected as Members of Rattihalli
Pattan Panchayat.
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16759
WP No. 109276 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020252042025
3.2 In terms of the election, the petitioners were issued
Certificate for having been elected as successful
th
candidates by Certificate dated 20 August, 2025.
3.3 It is also reflecting from the documents that
petitioner No.1 contested the election under the
symbol of political party (Congress) and petitioner
No.2 Independently.
3.4 For the purpose of electing Adhyaksha and
Upadhyaksha for Rattihalli Pattan Panchayat, election
was scheduled on 30.09.2025, as per the provisions
of Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act,
1
1993 .
4. Though it was contended that, petitioner No.2
subsequently joined Congress party, however the
respondent has not produced any document to that effect
to show that, petitioner No.2 joined the Congress party,
except producing the paper publication, which cannot be
1
Hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Act of 1993’
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16759
WP No. 109276 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020252042025
considered as a document of petitioner No.2 joining the
said party.
5. Be that as it may, the issue involved in this
case is that, a Whip has been issued by the concerned
person, who is authorized to issue Whip on both the
petitioners on 27.09.2025, in respect of election scheduled
on 30.09.2025, is valid in law and any act against the said
Whip would amount to disqualification from the
membership within the meaning of the Karnataka Local
Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 1987.
6. The law on issuance of Whip to be considered
as valid in law is no more res-integra with the
authoritative pronouncement of Judgment by the Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of SMT.SAVITA
AND OTHERS VS. THE DISTRICT PRESIDENT, BJP
2
AND OTHERS .
2
W.P.No.104407/2021, disposed of on 16.12.2022
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16759
WP No. 109276 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020252042025
7. The coordinate Bench of this Court in SAVITA
supra, following the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme
VISHAKA AND OTHERS VS. STATE
Court in the case of
3
OF RAJASTHAN , laid down guidelines. The relevant
paragraphs of the order run from Paragraph No.62 till end,
which read as under:
“62. Consequently, it will have to be held that
the order of disqualification passed by the Deputy
Commissioner is unsustainable for lack of proof of the
direction being communicated or served to the
petitioners and the impugned order is accordingly
quashed.
63. Before parting with the case, it would be
necessary to state that, as noticed above, the State
has not framed Rules under the 1987 Act and this has
contributed to several kinds of litigation and has
resulted in which the provisions of the 1987 Act have
not been enforced fully and effectively thereby
defeating the very purpose of maintaining integrity in
public life.
64. Thus, until the State frames Rules under
the 1987 Act, the following procedure shall be
followed in the matter of communicating the direction
of the Political party to its elected members.
3
(1997) 6 SCC 241
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16759
WP No. 109276 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020252042025
65. The political party or the person
authorized by it to issue a direction shall submit a
copy of the direction that it has issued to all its
members to act in a particular manner to the
authority which is competent to convene the meeting,
at least 5 days before the meeting is convened.
66. The authority shall thereafter
communicate this direction to the members in the
same manner as provided for notifying the members
of the meeting convened.
67. The elected members, would thus, have
the option of seeking for permission to act contrary to
the direction and thus not be subjected to
disqualification under the Act.
68. If the direction of the political party is not
communicated to the authority empowered to convene
the meeting of the elected body, no proceedings for
disqualification shall be initiated against the elected
members.
69. If the direction of the political party is
communicated to the authority empowered to convene
the meeting, it shall be the duty of that authority to
ensure that the direction of the political party is
communicated to the elected member within 5 days
preceding the meeting and if notices are served in the
same manner relating to the convening of the
meeting, such service would be deemed service.
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16759
WP No. 109276 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020252042025
70. It shall also be open for the political
parties to effect service by RPAD or Courier of by
email to the elected members giving them at least 5
days to seek for permission to vote contrary to the
direction.
71. These guidelines shall be in force till
statutory rules are framed by the State under the
1987 Act.
72. A copy of this order be sent to the Chief
Secretary who shall ensure that appropriate directions
are issued to all concerned to abide by this procedure
until statutory rules have been framed.
73. Writ petition is accordingly allowed.”
8. The petitioners were declared disqualified from
the Membership of Rattihalli Pattan Panchayat by means of
order passed by the Deputy Commissioner cum District
Election Officer, Haveri, for violation of the provisions of
Karnataka Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act,
1987, on the complaint of respondent No.2.
9. The only point which is to be considered by this
Court is, in terms of the law laid down by the Coordinate
Bench of this Court in SAVITA supra is that, ‘Whether the
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16759
WP No. 109276 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020252042025
Whip is served at least five days prior to the date of
election’?
10. The answer is obviously in the Negative. The
reason being, the order of Whip at Annexures-R3 and R4
clearly indicate that they are issued on 27.09.2025 in
respect of an election scheduled to be held on 30.09.2025.
11. This Court at the first instance, while granting
interim order, heard learned counsel appearing for both
the parties and passed the following order:
“ ORAL ORDER
I.A.No.1/2025 is allowed.
Production of typed copy of Annexure-E dispensed
with.
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners, learned counsel appearing for respondent
No.2 and learned Additional Advocate General appearing
for respondent No.1.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
admittedly the whip is alleged to have been served on
the petitioners on 27.09.2025. The election was
supposed to be held on 30.09.2025. Thus, he would
refer to the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16759
WP No. 109276 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020252042025
Court in Smt.Savita and others v. the District President,
Bharati Janata Party and others , wherein it is held that
the whip has to be served at least 5 days before the
date of the election. Even according to the respondents,
the whip is not served before 5 days from the date of
election. Apart from that the petitioners also contend
that their signature is forged and the whip is not served.
Petitioner No.1 contends that petitioner No.1 has not
joined the Congress Party.
This being the position, the Court is of the view a
prima facie case is made out to stay the operation of the
order as it appears that the alleged service of whip is in
violation of the guidelines laid down by this Court in the
case of Smt.Savita supra.
Accordingly, the operation of the impugned order
is stayed till next state.
The respondents are permitted to file application
for modification/vacation of the interim order along with
the statement of objection.
Secure records from the Office of the Deputy
Commissioner.
List on 12.01.2026.”
12. A perusal of the order passed by the Deputy
Commissioner shows that, he has not at all considered the
Judgment of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16759
WP No. 109276 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020252042025
SAVITA supra, in respect of issuance of Whip, which is
required to be issued at least five days prior to the date of
election scheduled. In that view of the matter, the order
passed by the Deputy Commissioner falls short to the
guidelines issued by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in
SAVITA supra. In view thereof, the Writ Petition is
allowed . The order passed by the Deputy Commissioner
Cum District Election Officer, Haveri is set-aside.
13. Needless to say that the petitioners shall
continue as Members in terms of the interim order granted
earlier.
14. At this stage, Sri.Shivaraj P.Mudhol, learned
counsel brought to the notice of the Court, the order
passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in
SRI.SURESH AND OTHERS VS. THE STATE OF
4
KARNATAKA AND OTHERS , wherein the Coordinate
4
W.P.No.105239/2021, disposed of on 21.04.2022
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16759
WP No. 109276 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020252042025
Bench of this Court considering the importance of the
matter and the issue involved, passed the following order:
“44. The petition stands dismissed.
Kihoto Hollohan
45. The Apex Court in ’s
case has succinctly explained the concept of
defection and the impact thereof on the
democracy of the India. It is therefore required
that suitable rules are required to be framed for
the implementation of the Act at the earliest. The
Act having first published first published in the
th
Karnataka Gazette on 5 May, 1987, amended in
the year 1995, 2010 and 2013, it is rather
shocking that no rules have been framed in
respect of the said Act.
46. Smt.Vidyavathi K. learned Additional
Advocate General on enquiry submitted that an
endeavor would be made to formulate rules
expeditiously without committing on the time.
47. These being the important matters, it is
required of the State to bestow its attention for
formulation of the rules. This Court hopes and
believes that the State shall formulate the rules
within a period of 6 months from the date of this
order.
48. In the event of the same not being
capable of being formulated by the State, the
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16759
WP No. 109276 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020252042025
State can approach this Court for suitable
extension.”
15. Though this order is passed on 21.04.2022, till
this date, the State Government has not formulated the
Rules. In that view of the matter, the Coordinate Bench of
this Court in SAVITA supra issued guidelines.
16. It is also germane to note here that, learned
AGA in the case of SURESH supra, has submitted that an
endeavor would be made to formulate Rules expeditiously
without committing on the time. However, till this date, no
action has been contemplated. It is high time for State
Government to formulate Rules in that regard, in view of
the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
VISHAKA and by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in
SURESH and SAVITA supra.
17. The Registry is directed to send a copy of this
order to the Chief Secretary to take all endeavors to frame
the Rules exercising power under Section 9 of the
- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:16759
WP No. 109276 of 2025
CNR: KAHC020252042025
Karnataka Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act,
1987, as expeditiously as possible, within a period of six
months from the date of communication and file
compliance report before this Court, immediately after
expiry of six months, in terms of Judgments supra.
Sd/-
(T.M.NADAF)
JUDGE
TKN
CT: UMD
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28