SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Bom) 157

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
S.J. KATHAWALLA, VINAY JOSHI, JJ.
Sopan Kishanrao Narwade and Another – Petitioners
Versus
State of Maharashtra and Others – Respondents
Writ Petition (ST) No. 96781 of 2020, Interim Application (ST) No. 97548 of 2020
Decided On : 12-01-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: P.B. Gujar.
For the Respondents: R.M. Shinde, S.B. Shetye, Irfan Shaikh, Sarika Shetye.
For the Intervenor : Sachin R. Pawar.

The main legal point established in the judgment is that if objections were invited, raised, and rejected by the relevant authority, the court cannot entertain the challenge to the delimitation of Panchayat area or the formation of constituencies and allotment of seats.

Headnote:

Election - Delimitation of Panchayat Wards - Article 243K, Article 243-O - Jadhav Shankar Dyandeo and Another vs. Collector, Satara and Another - The court held that the delimitation of panchayat area, formation of constituencies, and allotment of seats cannot be entertained by the court if objections were invited, raised, and rejected by the relevant authority. The court also cited Article 243-O, which bars interference by courts in electoral matters.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners challenged the formation of wards of Graampanchayat Khandale, Taluka - Shirur, District - Pune, and the delimitation of Panchayat area/constituencies. The petitioners alleged that they were not informed about the meeting of the Gramsabha and objected to the ward formation after the prescribed period.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the objections were not filed within the prescribed period and that the objections raised by the petitioners cannot be entertained. The court dismissed the writ petition and directed the petitioners to pursue the remedy provided under Section 15 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959.

Issues: The main issue was whether the court could entertain the petitioners' challenge to the formation of wards and delimitation of Panchayat area/constituencies.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that if objections were invited, raised, and rejected by the relevant authority, the court cannot entertain the challenge to the delimitation of Panchayat area or the formation of constituencies and allotment of seats. The court also cited Article 243-O, which bars interference by courts in electoral matters.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition and directed the petitioners to pursue the remedy provided under Section 15 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959.

JUDGMENT :

S.J. KATHAWALLA, J.

1. By the above Writ Petition the Petitioners seek to challenge the formation of wards of Graampanchayat Khandale, Taluka - Shirur, District - Pune, whose elections are scheduled to be held on 15th January, 2021. In other words the Petition challenges the delimitation of Panchayat area/constituencies determined by the authorities (i.e.) Respondent Nos. 2 to 6.

2. The reliefs sought in the above Writ Petition are as follows:

“(b) By an Order of this Hon'ble Court the writ of Certiorari or any other writ, order or directions in the like nature, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash and set aside the final notification published by the authorities for the formation of wards of the Grampanchayat Khandale, Taluka - Shirur, District Pune, for the general elections of 2020 and for that purpose issue necessary orders.

(c) By issuing writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or directions in the like nature, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash and set aside Order dated 09/11/2020 passed by the Respondent No. 4/Sub Divisional Officer, Pune thereby rejecting the Objections dated 12/03/2020 raised by the Petitioners of directing the Respondent authorities to revise the final notification thereby changing the formation of wards of the Grampanchayat Khandale, Taluka - Shirur, District - Pune and for that purpose issue necessary orders.”

3. The facts which are relevant for deciding the reliefs sought in the above Writ Petition, are briefly set out hereunder:

3.1 On 29th November, 2019, Respondent No. 2-State Election Commission published guidelines and procedure for formation of wards and reservation of seats for village panchayats whose tenure was coming to an end between July 2020 and December, 2020.

3.2 The objections and suggestions with regard to formation of wards and reservation of seats were invited by the Tahsildar between 7th February, 2020 to 14th February, 2020, and thereafter forwarded to the Sub-Divisional Officer (‘SDO’) on 20th February, 2020 for hearing.

3.3 On 29th February, 2020, the SDO gave hearing to the persons who had submitted their objections and suggestions and sent his report/proposal to the Collector on 11th March, 2020, for his final decision on the formation of wards and reservation of seats.

3.4 The Petitioners had admittedly not fled any objection with the SDO during the prescribed period i.e. between 7th February, 2020 to 14th February, 2020. However, on 6th March, 2020, the Petitioners gave a complaint to the Deputy Chief Executive Officer (‘DCEO’) alleging therein that though Petitioner No. 1 was the Sarpanch of the village at the relevant time, he was not informed about the alleged meeting of the Gramsabha held on 30th January, 2020 in an enquiry made by Petitioner No. 1 in the first week of February, 2020 with the Tahsildar as to whether any steps were taken/being taken with regard to the ward formation in Grampanchayat Chale, Dist. Solapur, the response received by him was in the negative ; however in March, 2020, the Petitioner No. 1 received information that there was in fact a change in the ward formation and shifting of voters from Ward-1 to Ward-3 and also that the meeting of the Gramsabha was held on 30th January, 2020. According to the Petitioners, upon receipt of the Petitioner’s complaint, the DCEO forwarded the same to the Block Development Officer (‘BDO’) on 9th March, 2020 and required him to make enquiry with regard to the Gramsabha Meeting held on 30th January, 2020, which according to the Petitioners was illegal. On 12th March, 2020, the Petitioners fled their objections along with the signatures of 75% affected voters with the Collector along with an application seeking condonation of delay.

3.5 In the meantime, elections were suspended due to the pandemic.

3.6 The Order of suspension of election was revoked on 20th September, 2020.

3.7 On 25th October, 2020, the Petitioners fled their written objections with the Office of the Collector.

3.8 On 26th October,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top