Chamarajanagar, Karnataka – The tragic death of a Panchayat worker in Chamarajanagar district has prompted swift administrative action, including the suspension of a senior official and the initiation of a departmental inquiry. The incident has also reignited public debate over alleged harassment and delays in payment of honorarium for grassroots workers in Karnataka’s Panchayat system.

The deceased, Chikkusanayaka, was a former Panchayat employee serving as a waterman in Honganur Gram Panchayat, originally part of Kempanapur Gram Panchayat. On the day of the incident, Chikkusanayaka was found hanging from a window in the Panchayat building. Authorities discovered a death note in which he cited serious grievances against the administration, alleging that non-payment of his honorarium for nearly 27 months, combined with harassment by Panchayat officials, had made life “difficult to live.”

The note specifically mentioned the inaction of Ramegowda KN, the In-Charge Panchayat Development Officer (PDO) of Honganur Gram Panchayat, and the husband of the Gram Panchayat Chairperson, holding them responsible for his suffering. The allegations drew immediate attention from both the district administration and law enforcement.

Following the incident, Chamarajanagar East Police Station registered a first information report (FIR), citing violations under the Indian Penal Code, 2023, as well as the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The case highlighted the sensitive nature of governance and employee welfare at the Panchayat level, emphasizing the consequences of administrative negligence in local government institutions.

A subsequent internal investigation by the state administration revealed lapses in the duties of Ramegowda KN, the In-Charge Panchayat Development Officer. The inquiry noted that the officer had failed to perform responsibilities mandated under Section 111 of the Karnataka Gramswaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993. Further, the report cited dereliction of duty and violations of Rule 3(i)(ii) and (iii) of the Karnataka Civil Service (Conduct) Rules, 1966.

In response to these findings, Ramegowda KN was placed under suspension, and a departmental inquiry was ordered to continue during the period of suspension. Under the provisions of Rule 10(1)(d) of the Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957, the suspended officer is barred from leaving the workplace without prior permission. During the suspension, Ramegowda KN will receive subsistence allowance as per Rule 98 of the Karnataka Civil Service Regulations.

The incident has prompted strong reactions from political leaders in the state. R Ashok, Leader of Opposition in the Karnataka Assembly, sharply criticised the Congress-led government, accusing it of mismanaging state resources and prioritizing political games over governance. He highlighted the financial distress faced by contractors due to delayed payments, claiming that pending bills amount to ₹3,300 crore across multiple departments, including irrigation, housing, PWD, and labor.

In a post on X, R Ashok stated, “Mr. @RahulGandhi, is this your so-called ‘Karnataka Model’? Under the corrupt and exploitative #ATMSarkara, Karnataka has gone bankrupt. Contractors are demanding ₹33,000 crore in unpaid dues from eight government departments! The state coffers are being squeezed dry to save political chairs, while ordinary workers and contractors suffer.”

He further criticised the state government for its “arrogance and silence” over pressing administrative issues, accusing it of systemic corruption and neglect. The opposition leader’s remarks also brought national attention to the tragic death of Chikkusanayaka, emphasizing the wider implications of administrative inefficiency on grassroots employees.

The incident has raised urgent questions regarding worker welfare and administrative accountability in Karnataka’s Panchayat system. Many activists and local residents have called for strict measures to ensure timely payment of honorariums, fair treatment of employees, and mechanisms to prevent harassment at the grassroots level.

Meanwhile, the suspended officer awaits the outcome of the departmental inquiry, while authorities continue to assess the Panchayat’s administrative functioning and review existing protocols for employee grievance redressal. The tragic death of Chikkusanayaka underscores the importance of responsive governance and the human consequences of administrative lapses in public service.