BBMP Mayoral poll result will be subject to plea against

The Karnataka High Court today ordered that the result of September 11 Mayoral election to the city civic body BBMP would be subject to the outcome of a petition challenging a provision in the relevant law that allowed non-corporators to vote in the exercise.
Justice Raghavendra Chavan gave the interim order on a petition by five BJP members of Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) challenging Section 10 of Karnataka Municipal Act 1976, which allows both non-corporators and corporators to participate in the Mayoral poll.
The petition has been filed in the backdrop of JD(S) deciding to join hands with Congress for the mayoral polls. BJP has emerged as the single largest party with 100 directly elected corporators out of the 198 wards in the recent polls.

But it is short by six of the magic figure of 131, including corporators, required to gain control of BBMP.
Besides corporators, the 260-member BBMP Council includes 62 other members from Bengaluru with voting rights. They include members of Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, MLAs and MLCs.
Congress, JD(S) and others have bagged 76, 14 and eight wards respectively and their strength includig non-corporators stood at 111 (Congress), 21 (JDS) and others (13).

The petition was filed by five first-time women BJP corporators - M Pramila, R Pratima, Deepa Nagesh, Umavati Padmaraj and Kumari Palanikant, questioning the Act and participation of MLAs, MPs and MLCs in Mayoral poll.

When the matter came up for hearing, the Judge observed that he cannot rush into giving a verdict before giving a full hearing to decide the constitutionality of what constitutes "Corporation" under Section 10 of KMC Act.
"I need time to arrive at a conclusion to decide on the constitutionality of the participation of non-corporators in Mayoral poll - so until then, I suggest that let the election to the Mayor's post be held," Justice Chavan said.
However, he said the court will keep aside the election of the Mayor if the constitutionality of the participation of non-corporators was invalidated.

Petitioners aruged that Article 243(R) of the Constitution makes a distinction between directly-elected corporators and nominated members of the municipality.
It places the corporators on a higher pedestal vis-a-vis the nominated members, which does not provide voting rights to them, they claimed.
Advocate General Ravivarma Kumar submitted there were precedence to show that such elections were conducted hundred times in various corporations. "Such elections have been conducted nearly 10 times in Bengaluru alone," he added.