Local candidate does not march over more meritorious ones in fray: HC

S Shyam Prasad | NT

Bengaluru: Merely being a local does not entitle a candidate to march over other more meritorious ones in the fray, the High Court of Karnataka has ruled.

Dismissing an appeal and upholding a singlejudge order who had quashed the appointment of a candidate as a waterman in a Panchayat, the HC said, “Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and having perused the appeal papers, we decline indulgence in the matter inasmuch as, any appointment has to be preceded by a select list prepared on the basis of comparative merits of the candidates in the fray. Admittedly, the assessment of comparative merits was not undertaken and therefore learned Single Judge is right in quashing the appointment and its approval.”

The appeal was filed by one C Sachin Gowda, from Ramanagara which was heard by the division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit. Honganuru Gram Panchayat had passed a resolution on January 1, 2020 appointing him as a waterman.

The Chief Executive Officer of the Zilla Panchayat had accorded approval of the said appointment. This was challenged by Sharath A, another candidate.

The single-judge bench quashed the appointment of Sachin after which he filed an appeal before the Division Bench.

His advocate argued that the single-judge order was “vulnerable for challenge inasmuch as it ignores power of the Grama Panchayat to make appointment of the kind; the appellant being the local candidate has been selected and was sought to be appointed; this cannot be said to be wrong.”

The Division Bench upheld the single-judge order pointing out that “Learned Single Judge has lucidly stated that the preparation of select list on the basis of comparative merits of the candidates is a normative requirement for making appointment. Merely because the candidate now selected happens to be a local candidate, he does not march over more meritorious ones in the fray.”

Dismissing the appeal, the HC said that if the merit were similar, advantage could be given to the local candidate, but not otherwise.

“Had he been similarly circumstanced along with others in terms of merits, perhaps some preference being shown on account of his being a local candidate arguably could have been countenanced. However, that is not the case here. In the above circumstances, this writ appeal lacking in merits deserves to be and accordingly is dismissed,” it said.

(WA 33/2023)