Yashodamma G. and anr. Vs. State of KarnatakA. Rep. by Its Secretary, Department of Urban Development and ors.

.....excluding the nominated members who have no right to vote . the councillors who are present at the special meeting either elected or nominated is to be taken for the purpose of quantifying 2/3rd of the total number of councillors . held, on facts, . if the nominated members in two municipalities are taken for the purpose of quantitying 2/3rds of the total number of members present at the meeting, the resolution is not carried by 2/3 rds of the total number of councillors present at the meeting . resolutions quashed. ; (b) karnataka municipalities act, 1964 (22 of 1964) - section 42(9) of the act . word .at. . in view of the word .at. found in section 42(9) of the act, the 2/3rds of the total number of municipal council which includes elected and nominated members, if they are present at the special meeting are to be taken for counting.; allowing the writ petitions, quashing the impugned order and the resolutions, the court, ; under proviso to section 11(1) of the act, the persons who are nominated under section 11(1)(b) of the act as councillors of the municipal council have no right to vote in the meeting of the municipal council. but, they are entitled to participate in the proceeding of the meeting. section 42(9) of the act provides that the president of the municipal council shall be deemed to have vacated his office if a resolution expressing want of confidence in him is passed by a majority of not less than 2/3 rds of the total number of councillors at a special general meeting.; court has placed its reliance on the unreported judgment of this court, in w.p.no. 12320/1997 disposed of on 10.12.1997 in the matter of smt. chandubi vs deputy commissioner, chitradurga and others. ; from the reading of this judgment it is clear that the councillors who are present at the special meeting is to be taken for the purpose of quantifying 2/3rds of the total number of councillors and not the whole number of municipal councillors. in view of the above said.....order and the resolutions, thecourt, heldunder proviso to section 11(1) of the act, the persons whoare nominated under section 11(1)(b) of the act as councillors ofthe municipal council have no right to vote in the meeting of themunicipal council. but, they are entitled to participate in theproceeding of the meeting. section 42(9) of the act provides thatthe president of the municipal council shall be deemed to havevacated his office if a resolution expressing want of confidencein him is passed by a majority of not less than 2/3 rds of thetotal number of councillors at a special general meeting.court has placed its reliance on the unreported judgment ofthis court, in w.p.no. 12320/1997 disposed of on 10.12.1997 inthe matter of smt. chandubi vs deputy commissioner,chitradurga and others. from the reading of this judgment it is clear that thecouncillors who are present at the special meeting is to be takenfor the purpose of quantifying 2/3rds of the total number ofcouncillors and not the whole number of municipal councillors.in view of the above said decision, i hold that the nominatedmembers, though they have no right to vote in the meeting, asthey are the councillors as defined under the act, if they arepresent at the special meeting are to be counted for the purposeof quantifying 2/3rds of the total number of councillors.