Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.M. KHANWILKAR, HEMANT GUPTA, DINESH MAHESHWARI, JJ.
Laxmibai - Appellant
Versus
The Collector, Nanded And Others - Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 1622-1626 of 2020 (Arising Out of SLP (Civil) No. 16837, 20814-20816 of 2019, 4438 of 2020) [Diary No. 40018 Of 2019]
Decided On : 14-02-2020
(A) Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 – Section 14B – Disqualification on account of non-submission of election expenses within period prescribed – Election Commission is to be satisfied as to whether a person has no good reason or justification for failure to furnish account of election expenses – Disqualification for a period of five years is not necessary consequence of merely not filing account of election expenses – There is no prohibitive or negative expressions used in Section 14B of 1959 Act, as it empowers Election Commission to pass a just order of disqualification – Such provision cannot be treated to be mandatory period of five years in view of plain language of Statute. (Paras 8, 11 and 13)
(B) Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 – Section 14B – Constitution of India – Article 243-O – Disqualification on account of non-submission of election expenses within period prescribed – Though, Section 14B of 1959 Act empowers Commission to disqualify a candidate for a period not exceeding five years from the date of order, but to pass an order of disqualification for five years, which may disqualify him to contest next elections as well requires to be supported by cogent reasons and not merely on the fact of not furnishing of election expenses – Order of disqualification for a period of five years is without taking into consideration extent of default committed by appellant and that will of people is being interfered with in wholly perfunctory way – Such mechanical exercise of power without any adequate reasons, though required to be recorded, renders order of disqualification for a period of five years as illegal and untenable – It is abdication of power which is coupled with a duty to impose just period of disqualification – Though appellant could be disqualified for a period upto five years, but such period of disqualification must be supported by tangible reasons lest it would border on being disproportionate – Order passed by Collector and subsequent orders in appeal and in writ petition set aside in part to the extent of prescribing disqualification for a period of five years and matter remitted to Collector to take into consideration period of delay/default, purport for which election expenses are sought to be furnished and order of disqualification operates from date of order including delay in passing order of disqualification – Collector shall pass order afresh in respect of period of disqualification in accordance with law. (Paras 20 and 21)
(C) Constitution of India – Articles 226 and 243-O – Election dispute – Once alternate machinery is provided by statute, recourse to writ jurisdiction is not an appropriate remedy – It is a prudent discretion to be exercised by High Court not to interfere election matters, especially after declaration of results of elections but relegate parties to remedy contemplated by statute. (Para 43)
Facts of the case:
Challenge in the present appeal is to an order dated 10th December, 2018 passed by Single Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay dismissing the writ petition filed by appellant against an order of disqualification under Section 14B of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 19591 on account of non-submission of election expenses within the period prescribed. Question which arises is that whether delay of 15 days necessarily follows the disqualification for a period of five years.
Findings of the Court:
Once alternate machinery is provided by the statute, the recourse to writ jurisdiction is not an appropriate remedy. It is a prudent discretion to be exercised by the High Court not to interfere in the election matters, especially after declaration of the results of the elections but relegate the parties to the remedy contemplated by the statute.
Result : Appeals dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
HEMANT GUPTA, J.
Civil Appeal & SLP(C) No. 16837 of 2019
1. Leave granted.
2. The challenge in the present appeal is to an order dated 10th December, 2018 passed by the learned Single Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant against an order of disqualification under Section 14Bof the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959[for short, 1959 Act'] on account of non-submission of election expenses within the period prescribed.
3. The election of Gram Panchayat, Mugat, Taluk Mudkhed, District Nanded were held on 1st November, 2015. The results were declared on 4th November, 2015. The appellant was elected as a Member of Village Panchayat. The appellant was required to furnish election expenses within 30 days in the manner prescribed by the State Election Commission in terms of Section 14B of the 1959 Act. The appellant submitted expenses with delay of 15 days. The appellant was served with a show cause notice on 3rd March, 2016 as to why she should not be disqualified on account of failure to submit the election expenses. The appellant submitted her explanation that due to ill-health there was a delay of 15 days in furnishing of details of expenses and that delay may be condoned.
4. The Collector as a delegate of the State Election Commission passed an order dated 9th August, 2018 disqualifying the appellant for a period of five years to be a member of Gram Panchayat only for the reason that the appellant has not submitted election expenses within time.
5. The appeal against such order was dismissed on 19th November, 2018 by the Additional Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad for the reason that the medical certificate is not issued by the Competent Authority. The said order was challenged before the Writ Court wherein the High Court held as under:
"5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has tendered a copy of medical certificate on which petitioner had relied upon. The same is taken on record and marked "X" for identification. This document has no particulars whatsoever, such as name, diagnosis, date and reference number etc. There is nothing mentioned. This certificate issued by a private hospital bears only a stamp of the doctor. It is stated that the petitioner was suffering from hypertension, diabetes and was advised bed rest. This document, on the face of it, cannot be relied upon. If the authorities have not accepted such a document, there is no error in the view taken by them."
6. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that the appellant was advised bed rest on account of hypertension and diabetes, which fact caused unintended delay of furnishing of election expenses. It is also argued that the appellant is duly elected member of Panchayat and that an order of disqualification can be passed if the candidate fails to show any good reason or justification for the failure to submit accounts. It is also submitted that there is no finding that the accounts furnished, though with delay of fifteen days, are not proper or not in accordance with applicable rules or instructions. The order of disqualifying her for five years, in fact, jeopardises her right to contest election until 8th August, 2023 (i.e. from the date of the order passed on 9th August, 2018).
7. It is argued that since the appellant is a duly elected representative of Village Mugat and has been elected in a democratic process, the disqualification for a period of five years without taking into consideration the extent of default and the consequences of disqualification renders the order of disqualification as wholly disproportionate to the deficiency alleged against the appellant. It is argued that an order of disqualification should have been passed without delay and not nearly after 3 years of the elections. It is further argued that disqualification for a period of five years is the maximum period of disqualification whereas in terms of sub-section (2) of Section 14B of the 1959 Act, the
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
