Date:04/01/2007 URL: http://www.thehindu.com/2007/01/04/stories/2007010421600400.htm

Karnataka - Bangalore

`Prove charge on delay in elections to BMP council'

Staff Reporter

PIL petition seeking elections to the BMP Council filed

Petitioner says constitution of the BBMP is a ruse to delay the elections

Government notification seeks to merge seven local bodies with BMP

BANGALORE: The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday asked a former councillor of the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BMP) to place before it materials, if any, to indicate that the State Government had deliberately put off elections to the BMP Council.

The court was dealing with a public interest litigation (PIL) petition seeking expeditious elections to the BMP Council and declare as illegal and ultra vires a November 23, 2006 notification seeking to merge seven local bodies around Bangalore with the BMP and constitute the Bruhut Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP).

The petitioner contended that the constitution of the BBMP was only a ruse to delay the elections to the civic body and if the Government was serious about the formation of a greater Bangalore agency, it could have done it much earlier and not on the eve of elections to the civic body.

When the matter came up, the petitioner placed before the court a Supreme Court judgment on holding of elections to local bodies.

He said that the Government had in its affidavit during the last hearing indicated that at least six months would be required to complete the process before notifying the State Election Commission (SEC).

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Cyriac Joseph and Justice B.S. Patil observed that it was for the petitioner to prove to the court and place materials before them to substantiate their charge that the Government had deliberately delayed the formation of the BBMP so as to ensure that elections to the BMP were postponed.

The Bench asked the petitioner to assist the court on whether it could take cognisance of such an act by the Government and also on what it could do when the courts were led to a particular situation.

"Give us citations so that we can take action," they said.

It observed that the affidavits of both the SEC and the State had indicated that the process of delimitation should be completed before elections could be held.

"Tell us if this is necessary and elections can beheld without completing the process of delimitation," it said.

The Bench said that it wanted to know whether elections could be held from the notified wards and if nominations could be made from the newly added areas proposed to be merged with the BMP.