![]() Online edition of India's National Newspaper Saturday, Jun 17, 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Karnataka |
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary |
Karnataka
-
Bangalore
Staff Reporter
BANGALORE: The Karnataka High Court on Friday held that the Delimitation Commission had no powers to issue a direction to the State Government not to create additional wards and not to alter the boundaries of existing wards under the provisions of the Delimitation Act of 1972. Allowing a petition by Hanumanthappa and four others from Sindhanur in Raichur district, the court said the Commission was constituted only for readjustment of constituencies and delimitation of the constitution of the House of the People and legislature of each State. Readjustment of the number of seats or the delimitation of the wards did not fall within the jurisdiction of the Commission, it said. It said there was no provision in the enactment which empowered the Delimitation Commission to direct the State not to alter existing wards or create new wards in terms of the legislation governing elections to municipalities or local bodies. A Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice Cyriac Joseph and Justice N. Kumar, passed the order on a public interest litigation petition seeking a direction to the State Election Commission (SEC) not to hold elections to the Sindhanur Town Panchayat till delimitation of wards was completed as per the 2001 Census. While allowing the petition, the Bench directed the SEC and the authorities State Government and the Deputy Commissioner of Raichur not to conduct the elections before determining the number of territorial wards as per Section 11 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act. The Bench directed the Government to issue expeditiously a notification as contemplated under Section 13 of the Act to ensure that the SEC conducted the elections in accordance with the mandate of the Constitution. It said there was no virtue in the submission of the State that if the elections were postponed, it would be in violation of the Constitution.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Home |
Copyright © 2006, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|