Court Dismisses PIL Challenging Constitutionality Of Shivakumar’s Council Of Ministers
Court rejects plea questioning ministers’ constitutional validity.
The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the constitutionality of Chief Minister DK Shivakumar’s newly formed council of ministers, holding that the petition was based on a misinterpretation of the Constitution. The court also imposed a cost of ₹50,000 on the petitioner, describing the plea as a publicity-oriented exercise that unnecessarily consumed judicial time.
The petition was filed by Hubballi resident Mangalappa Hullikeri, who sought the dissolution of the 14-member council of ministers sworn in on June 3. Hullikeri argued that the composition of the cabinet violated Article 164(1A) of the Constitution, which governs the size of state councils of ministers. According to the petitioner, the cabinet strength was below the constitutionally mandated threshold.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice KS Hemalekha rejected the contention, stating that the plea was founded on an erroneous reading of the constitutional provision. The court observed that the petitioner had incorrectly assumed that the number of ministers in a state government must be at least 12 percent of the total strength of the legislature.
Also Read: DK Shivakumar Asks Officials To Prepare For Drought And Heavy Rainfall In Karnataka
Clarifying the constitutional position, the bench noted that Article 164(1A) provides that the total number of ministers, including the chief minister, cannot exceed 15 percent of the strength of the legislative assembly. The proviso further stipulates that the number of ministers in a state shall not be less than 12, irrespective of the size of the legislature. The court said a plain reading of the provision made the legal position clear.
The judges emphasized that Karnataka’s newly constituted 14-member council of ministers comfortably met the constitutional requirement. As a result, the challenge lacked any legal basis and could not be sustained. The court found no merit in the demand to dissolve the cabinet and dismissed the petition in its entirety.
The ruling reinforces the constitutional framework governing the size of state cabinets and underscores the judiciary’s reluctance to entertain petitions based on incorrect interpretations of settled legal provisions. By imposing costs on the petitioner, the court also signaled its intent to discourage frivolous litigation that burdens the judicial system.
Also Read: Shivakumar Attends NITI Aayog Meet, Seeks Centre Partnership For Karnataka Growth
