The Supreme Court has issued a notice regarding a challenge to the Karnataka High Court’s ruling on the caste validity of B. Devendrappa, a Legislative Assembly candidate. The court stayed election petition proceedings, emphasizing the significant legal concerns surrounding authority in caste-related electoral disputes. A hearing is set for February 14, 2025.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has issued a notice in a Special Leave Petition (SLP) challenging the Karnataka High Court’s order regarding the caste claim of a returned candidate to the Legislative Assembly. The apex court, while staying the election petition proceedings pending before the Karnataka High Court, observed that the case raises important legal questions regarding the jurisdiction of the High Court in caste-related election disputes.
A bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh passed an interim order, stating:
“Counter affidavit, if any, be filed within two weeks. Rejoinder, if any, be filed within one week thereafter. Meanwhile, further proceedings in Election Petition No. 19 of 2023 shall remain stayed.”
The Court also issued a notice to the respondent and scheduled the next hearing for February 14, 2025.
AOR V. M. Kannan appeared for the petitioner, while Senior Advocate Pramila Nesargi represented the respondent.
The Karnataka High Court, on December 13, 2024, dismissed an application filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) seeking rejection of an election petition challenging the caste status of B. Devendrappa, the returned candidate from the Jagalur Assembly Constituency.
The petitioner, G. Swamy, alleged that Devendrappa did not belong to the Scheduled Tribe (ST) but was from the Other Backward Community (OBC), rendering him ineligible to contest from the ST-reserved constituency. The petitioner further contended that the respondent had fraudulently secured a caste certificate to participate in the elections.
The Karnataka High Court ruled that the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments, etc.) Act, 1990 does not oust the High Court’s jurisdiction to decide election disputes questioning a candidate’s caste validity.
The Court also held that under Sections 80 and 80A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (RPA), election disputes, including caste-related issues, are within the jurisdiction of the High Court.
Rejecting the application under Order VII Rule 11, the High Court emphasized that the petition raised material facts constituting a cause of action, allowing the election petition to proceed.
The respondent, Devendrappa, opposed the election petition, arguing that:
- Jurisdiction Issue: The High Court lacked jurisdiction to decide caste validity, which lies with the District Caste Verification Committee (DCVC) under the Act.
- Res Judicata: The petition was barred as the respondent’s caste status had been upheld in a previous case.
The Supreme Court’s interim order staying the proceedings before the Karnataka High Court brings temporary relief for Devendrappa. The apex court’s notice indicates that the jurisdictional conflict regarding the authority to decide caste validity in election disputes will now come under closer scrutiny.
Legal Representation
The petitioner was represented by Advocates V. M. Kannan (AOR), A Mahesh Chowdhary, Harimohana N., Mayank Singh, and Rashi Singh. The respondent was represented by Senior Advocate Pramila Nesargi, along with Advocates Balaji Srinivasan (AOR), Harsha Tripathi, and Praveenn Nath S.
Case Title – B. Devendrappa v. G. Swamy [Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).1930/2025]
Read the Judgement here:
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
