1. Dispute over No Confidence Motion validity based on a member's disqualification for failing to produce a Caste Validity Certificate under the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 9 , 15 , 22 )
Back
Next 
2024 Supreme(SC) 101
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Vikram Nath, K.V. Viswanathan, JJ.
Sudhir Vilas Kalel & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Bapu Rajaram Kalel & Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 1776 of 2024 (@ Special Leave Petition (C) No. 23017 of 2023)
Decided On : 07-02-2024
Important Points
IMPORTANT POINT
A person who has ceased to be a member because of automatic disqualification, cannot continue as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat.
A person who has ceased to be a member because of automatic disqualification, cannot continue as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat.
Subject
Election Law - LOCAL BODY ELECTION
Act Referred
MAHARASHTRA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT: S.5(b)
MAHARASHTRA SCHEDULED CASTES, SCHEDULED TRIBES, DE-NOTIFIED TRIBES VIMUKTA JATIS, NOMADIC TRIBES, OTHER BACKWARD CLASSES AND SPECIAL BACKWARD CATEGORY REGULATION OF ISSUANCE AND VERIFICATION OF CASTES CERTIFICATE RULES: R.17, R.17(1), R.17(2)
MAHARASHTRA TEMPORARY EXTENSION OF PERIOD FOR SUBMITTING VALIDITY CERTIFICATE FOR CERTAIN ELECTIONS TO VILLAGE PANCHAYATS, ZILLA PARISHADS AND PANCHAYAT SAMITIS ACT: S.3, S.4
MAHARASHTRA VILLAGE PANCHAYATS ACT: S.30(1)(a)
MAHARASHTRA SCHEDULED CASTES, SCHEDULED TRIBES, DE-NOTIFIED TRIBES VIMUKTA JATIS, NOMADIC TRIBES, OTHER BACKWARD CLASSES AND SPECIAL BACKWARD CATEGORY REGULATION OF ISSUANCE AND VERIFICATION OF CASTES CERTIFICATE RULES: R.17, R.17(1), R.17(2)
MAHARASHTRA TEMPORARY EXTENSION OF PERIOD FOR SUBMITTING VALIDITY CERTIFICATE FOR CERTAIN ELECTIONS TO VILLAGE PANCHAYATS, ZILLA PARISHADS AND PANCHAYAT SAMITIS ACT: S.3, S.4
MAHARASHTRA VILLAGE PANCHAYATS ACT: S.30(1)(a)
Headnote
Maharashtra Temporary Extension of Period for Submitting Validity Certificate (for certain elections to Village Panchayats, Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis) Act, 2023 – Sections 3 and 4 – Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000 – Section 3 – Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Rules, 2012 – Rule 11 – No-Confidence Motion against Sarpanch – Validity of – Appellant No.1 stood automatically disqualified as a Member since he failed to produce Validity Certificate within 12 months from date of his election – Protective umbrella of Section 3 of Temporary Extension Act, 2023 will not be available to Appellant No.1 since he is hit by Section 3(2)(b), for the reason that there was no valid application pending on date of commencement of said Act – Appellant No.1 has ceased to be a member because of automatic disqualification – In view of this, proceedings of Tahsildar rejecting No-Confidence Motion on the ground that voting requirement of three-fourth of members “entitled to sit and vote”, was not fulfilled, cannot be sustained and has rightly been set aside by High Court – High Court was also justified in directing that Appellant No.2 should stop exercising powers as a Sarpanch and in further directing that election for post of village Sarpanch be notified afresh – Judgement and order of High Court affirmed. (Paras 40, 42 and 43)
Result : Appeal dismissed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Appellants claim the application was not rejected and thus protected by the Temporary Extension Act; Respondents argue automatic disqualification occurred due to non-compliance. (Para 27 , 28 )
3. The court found the member failed to diligently prosecute the application, leading to its closure, thus precluding protection under the Temporary Extension Act. (Para 31 , 32 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 39 )
4. Mandatory time limits for Validity Certificates result in automatic retrospective disqualification; protection under the Temporary Extension Act requires a validly pending application. (Para 13 , 14 , 38 , 40 )
5. Appeal dismissed; High Court judgment affirmed; No Confidence Motion held valid; Sarpanch directed to cease exercising powers. (Para 42 , 43 , 44 )
6. Is the time limit for submitting a Caste Validity Certificate mandatory?
Yes. The time limit provided in the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act is mandatory. Failure to produce the certificate within the stipulated period results in automatic retrospective termination of election and disqualification. (Para 13 , 14 )
7. Who is eligible for protection under the Temporary Extension Act, 2023?
Protection applies to elected members on reserved seats who applied for verification before nomination and whose applications remained pending before the Scrutiny Committee on the Act's commencement date. (Para 29 , 31 )
8. Does the Temporary Extension Act protect members whose applications were rejected due to non-compliance?
No. Section 3(2)(b) specifically excludes members whose applications for a Validity Certificate were rejected by the Scrutiny Committee, including rejections resulting from the applicant's own defaults. (Para 29 , 38 , 39 )
9. How does a member's disqualification affect a No Confidence Motion?
Disqualification reduces the total number of members entitled to sit and vote. This change in the denominator can result in a motion meeting the three-fourth majority requirement that would otherwise fail. (Para 2 , 22 , 42 )
JUDGMENT
K.V. Viswanathan, J.
1. Leave Granted.
2. The ‘war’ in this case is over the validity of a No Confidence Motion against Appellant No. 2 – Sushila Sitaram Kalel, the Sarpanch (Village head) of Jambulani Gram Panchayat. However, there is a ‘battle’ within, which entirely determines the result of the war. It is on the validity of the membership of Appellant No. 1 – Sudhir Vilas Kalel in the Panchayat. A Motion of No Confidence is to be carried by not less than three-fourth of the total number of members who are entitled, to ‘sit’ and ‘vote’. If the Appellant No. 1 was entitled to ‘Sit’ as a member on 19.06.2023, then the No Confidence Motion against Appellant No.2 cannot ‘Stand’, to deploy a Denningesque phrase. The High Court has found against the appellants. Aggrieved, they are before us in appeal.
3. Was the Appellant No.1, in law, a member of the Panchayat, entitling him to vote, is the question that arises for consideration in this case. Is the Appellant No. 1 covered by the protective umbrella under Sections 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Temporary Extension of Period for Submitting Validity Certificate (for certain elections to Village Panchayats, Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis) Act, 2023 [hereinafter referred to as the “Temporary Extension Act, 2023”]? If the answer is in the affirmative, the election of the Appellant No. 1 as a reserved Member in the election of the Gram Panchayat of Village Jambulani would stand validated. Consequently, the No Confidence Motion expressing No Confidence in the Appellant No. 2 – Sushila Sitaram Kalel (the Sarpanch) would also stand nullified. If Appellant No. 1 is held not to be entitled to the benefit of Section 3 of the Temporary Extension Act, 2023, then he would be deemed to have vacated his seat and consequently, the No Confidence Motion would stand carried. For a fuller understanding, the background facts and the statutory regime need to be set out in some detail.
Brief facts and the Legislative Regime:
4. On 30.12.2020, the Appellant No. 1 filed his nomination papers for contesting elections as a Member of the Panchayat of Village Jambulani, District Satara on a seat reserved for the OBC category. As early as on 03.02.2013 itself, the Appellant No. 1 was issued a Caste Certificate by the Sub Divisional Officer, District Satara certifying that he belongs to ‘Lonari’ Caste which is an Other Backward Class. He had on the same day of filing his nomination papers i.e. on 30.12.2020 applied for a Validity Certificate. This Validity Certificate is an essential requirement under the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000 [hereinafter referred to as the “Caste Certificate Act, 2000”]. There are elaborate rules framed under this Act which will be discussed later in the judgment.
5. Under Section 3 of this Act, any person belonging to Other Backward Class for the purpose of contesting for any elective post in any local authority, should apply in such form and in such manner as may be prescribed, to the Competent Authority for the issuance of a Caste Certificate. Under Section 4 of this Act, the Competent Authority is entitled to issue a Caste Certificate. This is a Certificate which the Appellant No. 1 possessed on 03.02.2013. However, this alone is not conclusive. Under Section 4(2), the Caste Certificate issued by the Competent Authority would be valid subject to the verification and grant of Validity Certificate by the Scrutiny Committee. Under Section 6 of this Act, the Government is authorized to constitute a Scrutiny Committee and prescribe the area of its jurisdiction. Under Section 6(2) of this Act, after obtaining the Caste Certificate from the Competent Authority, any person, desirous of availing of the benefits or concessions provided to the said caste, is authorized to make an application, w
