Whip Must Be Served At Least Five Days Before Election: Karnataka High Court Reinstates Panchayat President & Vice-President
The Court set aside Deputy Commissioner’s order disqualifying two Rattihalli Pattana Panchayat members under anti-defection law, directed the State to frame rules under the 1987 Act within six months.
The Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench has held that a political party’s whip must be served at least five days before the election to which it relates, and that a disqualification order passed without considering this requirement cannot stand. The Court applied the guidelines laid down in Smt. Savita & Ors. v. District President, BJP & Ors. W.P.No.104407/2021, disposed of on 16.12.2022.
Accordingly, the Bench set aside the Deputy Commissioner’s order disqualifying the President and Vice-President of Rattihalli Pattana Panchayat in Haveri district under the Karnataka Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 1987. The Court also directed the Registry to send the order to the Chief Secretary to frame rules under Section 9 of the 1987 Act within six months.
A Bench of Justice T.M. Nadaf observed, “A perusal of the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner shows that, he has not at all considered the Judgment of the Coordinate Bench of this Court, in respect of issuance of Whip, which is required to be issued at least five days prior to the date of election scheduled. In that view of the matter, the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner falls short to the guidelines issued by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in SAVITA supra. In view thereof, the Writ Petition is allowed. The order passed by the Deputy Commissioner Cum District Election Officer, Haveri is set-aside”.
Advocate Jayant Ramachandra Itagi appeared for the petitioners and Sunitha J. Sequeira, AGA appeared for the respondent.
The petitioners were elected members of the Panchayat in an election on August 17, 2025, with the first contesting on a Congress symbol and the second as an independent. An election for Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha was scheduled for September 30, 2025. The respondent alleged that a whip issued on September 27, 2025 was violated and that the second petitioner had joined the Congress. The Court noted the respondent produced only a paper publication, not a document, to show the second petitioner joined the party.
The Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Election Officer, Haveri, disqualified both on the complaint of respondent No. 2 by an order dated December 1, 2025. The petitioners challenged it under Articles 226 and 227. The High Court stayed the order on an interim basis, noting that the alleged service of the whip appeared to violate the Savita guidelines and that the petitioners also claimed forgery of their signatures.
The Court framed the only question as whether the whip was served at least five days before the election, and answered it in the negative, since the whip was issued on September 27 for an election on September 30. It held the Deputy Commissioner had not considered Savita at all. That judgment, following Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, requires the party to submit the direction to the convening authority at least five days before the meeting, and requires that authority to communicate it to members.
The writ petition was allowed, the order set aside, and the petitioners continue as members. Noting that the State had not framed rules despite the 2022 order in Suresh v. State of Karnataka, the Court called it “high time” to do so and directed a compliance report after six months.
Cause Title: Ravindrappa Mudiyappanavar & Anr. v. The Deputy Commissioner, Haveri & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2026:KHC-D:16759)
Appearances:
Petitioners: Jayant Ramachandra Itagi, Advocate.
Respondent: Sunitha J. Sequeira, AGA, Advocate Shivaraj P. Mudhol.