Karnataka HC Issue Directions To PRRD Authorities Over 100 Adjournments In Zilla Panchayat Proceedings

The Karnataka High Court has recently issued several directions to the Department of Panchayat Raj Rural Development Principal Secretary for improved functioning of administrative authorities discharging quasi judicial functions.

A single bench of Justice Suraj Govindraj was hearing a challenge to a Mandya District Zilla Panchayath order when he took a dim view of the proceedings’ more than hundred adjournments, reasoning that the presiding officer was preoccupied with other administrative functions.

“It is but required that the administrative authorities give equal, if not more prominence to quasi judicial functions where the rights of the citizens are affected like in this case when the order has been passed without jurisdiction, but also without information to citizen in the matter“, the single bench stated.

The bench noted the need to direct the Principal Secretary to establish a system and methodology for webhosting all case proceedings.

The order states that “all details of the proceedings would be required to be uploaded on the relevant website.”

Furthermore, the single-judge ruled that in the event of an adjournment, detailed reasoning must be provided rather than a laconic statement that the presiding officer is occupied with administrative duties.

In this matter, the bench also called for establishing a suitable monitoring system.

The Chief Secretary was directed to investigate the possibility of appointing a separate group of people who are not required to perform administrative functions to handle quasi-judicial functions.

The court also asked the Principal Secretary to investigate whether video conferencing facilities could be made available to the authorities in order to provide citizens with easy access to justice.

Appearing for the petitioner, Advocate GS Venkat Subbarao informed the bench that the delay in filing the appeal was caused by the fact that the next dates of hearing were not made available to them, and even the final order was not communicated.

It was noted at the outset that the court was encountering several revenue proceedings in various jurisdictions where quasi-judicial authorities were not holding proper sittings.

While the Zilla Panchayat’s order was overturned due to its lack of authority, the court issued a bunch of directives to improve the functioning of administrative authorities performing quasi-judicial functions.