1. Dispute over appointment of village headman under Section 5 of the Santal Parganas Tenancy (Supplementary Provisions) Act, 1949, following the voluntary resignation of the previous headman. (Para 2 )
Back
Next 
1996 Supreme(SC) 1877
1996(8) Supreme 626
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K. Ramaswamy and G.B. Pattanaik, JJ.
Sheapujan Bhagat -Appellant
versus
Thakur Hembrom & Ors. -Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 1085 of 1980
Decided on 7-11-1996
IMPORTANT POINT
Under the Santal Parganas Tenancy (Supplementary Provisions) Act, a stranger to the village was not intended to be elected as a headman.
Headnote:Santal Parganas Tenancy (Supplementary Provisions) Act, 1949-Section 5-Appointment of headman of village-A stranger to the village is not intended to be elected as a headman-Question of hereditary succession would have arisen if incumbent had died and his successor was available-Previous incumbent had voluntarily resigned hence hereditary succession did not arise-Appellant was not from the same village, he could not claim the right of appointment-Commissioner directed to hold a regular election. (Para 3)
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Whether the appointment of a village headman should be based on hereditary succession or through election, and whether a non-resident can contest such election. (Para 2 , 3 )
3. Hereditary succession applies only upon the death of an incumbent, not upon voluntary resignation; furthermore, a person from a different village cannot be elected as headman. (Para 3 )
4. Hereditary succession for headmanship is inapplicable upon voluntary resignation of the incumbent; candidates for headman must be residents of the village. (Para 3 )
5. Appeal disposed of with a direction to the Commissioner to conduct a regular election in accordance with Section 5 of the Act. (Para 3 , 4 )
6. When does the principle of hereditary succession apply to the appointment of a village headman under the Act?
Hereditary succession applies only when the incumbent headman dies and a successor is available, typically the son. It does not apply if the previous headman voluntarily resigned. (Para 3 )
7. Can a person who is not a resident of the village contest the election for village headman?
No. The court observed that the provisions of the Act do not intend for a stranger to the village to be elected as a headman. (Para 3 )
8. What is the procedure for appointing a headman in a Khas village under Section 5 of the Act?
Upon application by a raiyat or landlord and with the consent of at least two-thirds of the jamabandi raiyats, the Deputy Commissioner may declare a headman shall be appointed and proceed in the prescribed manner. (Para 2 )
ORDER
Though notice was sent to the legal representatives of the contesting respondents, the acknowledgment has not been received. Therefore, it must be deemed to have been served.
2. The only question for consideration is : whether the respondent should be appointed as a headman under Section 5 of the Santal Parganas Tenancy (Supplementary Provisions) Act, 1949 (Bihar Act 14 of 1949) (for short, the Act ) by virtue of hereditary right or by election ? It is seen that the village headman, by name Hari Hembrom, had resigned in 1950 as a headman and, thereafter, no appointment of the headman was made. In the meanwhile, the village has become Khas village within the meaning of Section 4(ix) of the Act. Resultantly, when an application was made by the Raiyats of the village, the Assistant Commissioner had directed to conduct the election in which the appellant was declared the successful candidate. When the respondent challenged the election before the authority, a remand order was passed. The appellant filed a revision before the Commissioner. The Commissioner accepting the contentions of the appellant set aside the order of appointment. When writ petition was filed against that order, the High Court by the impugned order had held that appointment should be made as far as possible under the hereditary principle. In case the candidate in the line of succession on hereditary principle is unavailable, then the election requires to be done. The question, therefore, is : whether the view taken by the High Court is correct in law? Section 4(ix) defines "Khas village", as a village in which there is no mulraiyat (headman) nor for the time being any village headman irrespective of whether there was not previously a mulraiyat or village headman in the village. Section 5 provides that on an application of a raiyat or of landlord of any Khas village and with the consent of at least two-thirds of the jamabandi raiyats of the village ascertained in the manner prescribed, the Deputy Commissioner may declare that a headman shall be appointed for the village and shall then proceed to make the appointment in the prescribed manner.
3. The question then is : whether a person from different village can contest the election for headman ? It is seen that a reading of the provisions does not indicate that a stranger to the village is intended to be elected as a headman. In this case, the appellant is right that the principle of hereditary succession does not arise since the previous incumbent, Hari Hembrom had voluntarily resigned and, therefore, the question of hereditary succession does not arise. It would arise only when the incumbent dies and his successor is available; in such a situation, under the scheme of the Act, the headmanship is required to be given to his son. In this case, since Hari Hembrom had already resigned voluntarily, the question of hereditary succession does not arise. Admittedly, the appellant is not from the same village. Therefore, he cannot claim the right of appointment. The Commissioner, therefore, is directed to hold a regular election in accordance with the prescribed procedure and read with Section 5 of the Act.
4. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.
Appeal disposed of.
*******
