SRI HEMANNA H R vs THE RETURNING OFFICER
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59004
WP No. 32745 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010718882026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 17 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
WRIT PETITION NO. 32745 OF 2026 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI HEMANNA H R
S/O LATE RANGAPPA H R,
AGED 41 YEARS,
R/AT NO.1, SAMAVRUDDI NILAYA, 1ST CROSS
ROAD, 1ST MAIN ROAD, SHIVANANDA NAGAR,
NAGARABHAVI MAIN ROAD, MOODALAPALYA,
BENGALURU 560072.
PETITIONER
(BY SRI. DIVYATEJ H.N..,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE RETURNING OFFICER
BANGALORE TEACHERS AND KARNATAKA
SOUTH EAST GRADUATES CONSTITUENCY, AND
REGIONAL COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE DIVISION,
2ND FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, K H ROAD,
SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU 560027.
2. THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA,
NIRVACHAN SADAN,
ASHOKA ROAD,
NEW DELHI 110001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59004
WP No. 32745 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010718882026
3.
THE KARNATAKA CHIEF ELECTORAL OFFICER,
NIRVACHANA NILAYA,
MAHARANI'S COLLEGE CIRCLE,
SESHADRI ROAD,
BENGALURU 560001.
4. SRI. ANWAR PASHA,
S/O NOT KNOWN,
AGED MAJOR,
ELECTION AGENT OF SRI. PUTTANNA,
R/AT C/O SRI. PUTTANNA, CHANDRA LAYOUT,
NO.101, 80 FEET ROAD,
VIJAYANAGARA,
BANGALURU 560040.
5. SRI. DEEPAK M,
S/O LATE G MANI,
AGED 33 YEARS,
R/AT NO.68, 7TH CROSS,
DAYANANDA NAGAR,
RAJAJINAGAR,
BENGALURU 560010.
RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S.R. DODWAD.,ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO 3)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA PRAYING TOISSUE WRIT IN THE
NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER
BEARING NO. ELN.CR/NOMINATION-04/2026-27 DATED
08.10.2026 PASSED BY RESPONDENTNO.1, REJECTING THE
NOMINATION PAPERS OF THE PETITIONER BEARING SL. NOS.
6, 7 AND 18 FOR ELECTION TO THE KARNATAKA LEGISLATIVE
COUNCIL FROM THE BANGALORE TEACHERS CONSTITUENCY,
2026, VIDE ANNEXURE-K AND ETC,.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59004
WP No. 32745 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010718882026
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
ORAL ORDER
The present writ petition is filed seeking for the following
reliefs:
a) Issue writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the
impugned order bearing No. ELN.CR/Nomination-
04/2026-27 dated 08.10.2026 passed by
respondent
No.1, rejecting the nomination papers of the
petitioner searing Sl. Nos. 6, 7 and 18 for
election to the Karnataka Legislative Council from
the Bangalore Teachers Constituency, 2026, vide
Annexure-K.
b) Issue writ in the nature of mandamus directing
respondent No.1 authority to reconsider the
petitioners nomination papers bearing Sl. Nos. 6,
7 and 18 in accordance with law, after proper
consideration of the appointment order, approval
of appointment, service records and other
relevant material, and to pass appropriate
consequential orders, subject to the applicable
constitutional and statutory provisions governing
the election process.
c) Issue writ in the nature of mandamus directing
respondent No.1 to 3 to take such consequential
steps as may be legally permissible pursuant to
the orders passed by this Hon'ble court, including
such steps as may be necessary to enable the
petitioner to contest the election to the Karnataka
Legislative Council from the Bangalore Teachers
Constituency scheduled to be held on
23.10.2026, if permitted in law.
d) Pass such other orders in favour of the petitioner
that this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interest of
justice and equity."
Digitally Signed by CHEPPUDIRA
MONNAPPA POONACHA
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59004
WP No. 32745 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010718882026
Interim prayer
Pending disposal of the captioned writ petition for
final adjudication, the petitioner most respectfully
prayed that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass
the ad-interim order:-
a) Stay the operation and effect of the impugned
order dated 08.10.2026, bearing No.
Eln.Cr/Nomination-04/2026-27, passed by
respondent no.1, insofar as it rejects the nomination
papers of the petitioner bearing Sl. Nos. 6, 7 and 18
for election to the Karnataka Legislative Council from
the Bangalore Teachers Constituency, 2026 vide
Annexure-K.
b) Direct respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to include the name
of the petitioner in the list of contesting candidates
published in form 7B vide notification No. DPAR 08
CHUVIPA 2026 dated 09.10.2026, produced vide at
Annexure-L, and consequently permit the petitioner
to contest the election to the Karnataka Legislative
Council from the Bangalore Teachers Constituency,
2026, scheduled to be held on 23.10.2026, in the
interests of justice and equity."
2. The petitioner, having filed his nomination papers
for the election to Bangalore Teachers Constituency for the
Karnataka Legislative Council and the said nomination having
been rejected vide the order dated 08.10.2026 (Annexure-K to
the writ petition) by respondent No.1 - Returning Officer, is
before this Court seeking for the aforementioned reliefs. The
nomination of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground
that he is holding an 'Office of Profit' as a Grant-in-Aid teacher
under the State Government as on the date of scrutiny and
Digitally Signed by CHEPPUDIRA
MONNAPPA POONACHA
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59004
WP No. 32745 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010718882026
hence, he is disqualified under Article 191(1)(a) of the
Constitution of India.
3. The petitioner by way of interim relief has also
sought for a direction to include his name in the list of the
contesting candidates.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents have raised a
preliminary objection as to the maintainability of the writ
petition. It is contended that having regard to the bar contained
under Article 329 of the Constitution of India and having regard
to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Meenakshi Natarajan V.s Election Commission of India
1
and Another , the writ petition is not maintainable.
5. In this context, it is pertinent to notice Article 329
of the Constitution of India which reads as under:
"Article 329 of the Constitution of India
329. Bar to interference by courts in electoral matters.—
Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution
(a) the validity of any law relating to the delimitation of
constituencies or the allotment of seats to such
constituencies, made or purporting to be made under
article 327 or article 328, shall not be called in question
in any court;
1
Order dated 12.06.2026 passed in WP(s)(Civil) No(s).766/2026
Digitally Signed by CHEPPUDIRA
MONNAPPA POONACHA
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59004
WP No. 32745 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010718882026
(b) no election to either House of Parliament or to the
House or either House of the Legislature of a State shall
be called in question except by an election petition
presented to such authority and in such manner as may
be provided for by or under any law made by the
appropriate Legislature."
(emphasis supplied)
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court while considering the
purport and effect of the same in the case of Meenakshi
1
Natarajan after noticing its judgment in the case of N.P.
Ponnuswami V.s Returning Officer, Namakkal
2
Constituency and Others held as under:
"10. The principles laid down in Ponnuswami (supra) has
been followed by this Court in all election related
disputes and whenever an attempt is made to invoke this
Court’s or the High Court’s writ jurisdiction to interject
during the process of conduct of election, on every
occasion, the Constitutional Court has rejected such an
attempt keeping in view the principle contained in Article
329(b) of the Constitution of India.
11. In a recent judgment, this Court in the matter of
Poonam vs. Dule Singh & Ors.6, authored by one of us
(Atul S. Chandurkar, J.), had an occasion to deal with a
similar case concerning non-disclosure of previous
conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881, by a candidate contesting
election for the post of Councillor in a Nagar Parishad, to
eventually hold that under the applicable rule, every
candidate contesting elections is required to furnish
information as prescribed in the format under Rule 24-
A(5) of the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Palika Nirvachan
Niyam, 1994.
2
(1952) 1 SCC 94
Digitally Signed by CHEPPUDIRA
MONNAPPA POONACHA
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59004
WP No. 32745 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010718882026
12. It is vehemently put forth by Dr. Abhishek Manu
Singhvi that in a case of this nature where the illegality
in rejection of nomination is glaring and manifest, this
Court must step in to curb the injustice, otherwise the
very sanctity of the election process would be affected.
However, this argument cannot be accepted in view of
the law laid down in Ponnuswami (supra). If this Court
accepts such argument to find out such glaring cases,
which are required to be interfered with under Articles 32
or 226 of the Constitution of India and the other set of
cases in which the rejection is not so improper prima
facie relegating them to avail the remedy of filing
election petition, this Court would be reading some
principle which is not provided for under Article 329 of
the Constitution of India. We are afraid, any such
interpretation, that in some cases this Court can
entertain a petition wherein a candidate’s nomination
paper has been improperly rejected, while leaving some
others to avail the remedy of filing an election petition
before the election tribunal, should not be encouraged,
being in direct conflict with the law laid down in
Ponnuswami (supra).
13. In view of the above, we are not inclined to entertain
this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India
in view of express bar contained in Article 329(b) of the
Constitution of India; therefore, the writ petition fails and
is hereby dismissed.
14. Needless to say, any observation made herein
concerning the basis of rejection of petitioner’s
nomination is only for the purpose of appreciating the
facts of the case and nothing contained in this Order
shall affect the election petition, should any such election
petition is filed by the petitioner or any other person
before the concerned High Court and the same shall be
decided on its own merits, in accordance with law."
(emphasis supplied)
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeking for the
relief sought for in the present writ petition places reliance on
the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Digitally Signed by CHEPPUDIRA
MONNAPPA POONACHA
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59004
WP No. 32745 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010718882026
Mohinder Singh Gill and Another V.s The Chief Election
3
Commissioner, New Delhi and Others as well as the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Election
4
Commission of India V.s Ashok Kumar and Others .
8. At this juncture, it is pertinent to notice that in the
1
case of Meenakshi Natarajan also reliance was placed by the
petitioner therein to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme
3
Court in the case of Mohinder Singh Gill and Election
4
Commission of India .
9. It is further pertinent to note that the judgment of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mohinder Singh
3
Gill arose from a fact situation, wherein during the process of
conducting of an election due to violence on the date of polling,
the Election Commission of India has inter-alia, ordered for re-
polling in certain constituencies. The fact situation in the said
case is completely different from the fact situation of the
present case.
10. It is also pertinent to notice that the case of
4
Election Commission of India arose in a fact situation
3
(1978) 1 SCC 405
4
(2000) 8 SCC 216
Digitally Signed by CHEPPUDIRA
MONNAPPA POONACHA
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59004
WP No. 32745 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010718882026
wherein, the order of the High Court staying the notification
issued by the Election Commission of India, as also containing
directions made by the High Court as to the manner of counting
of votes and directions was called in question before the
Hon'ble Supreme Court by the ECI, which fact situation also is
wholly different from the facts of the present case.
11. The aforementioned judgments relied upon by the
petitioner do not aid the case of the petitioner.
12. Accordingly, having regard to the embargo
contained under Article 329 of the Constitution of India and the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
1
Meenakshi Natarajan , the present writ petition stands
dismissed .
Digitally Signed by CHEPPUDIRA
MONNAPPA POONACHA
(C.M. POONACHA)
JUDGE
PNV
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12