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

2025 Supreme(Bom) 795

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY 
AMIT BORKAR, J.
Satyawan Ananta Padwale - Appellant 
Versus 
State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 5204 of 2025
Decided On : 21-04-2025

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Chintamani K. Bhangoji a/w Ms. Lata Bhangoji for petitioner.
Ms. Aloka A. Nadkarni, AGP for State for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. Sandesh D. Patil a/w Prithviraj S. Gole and Mr. Yogesh D. Keny for respondent Nos.3.

Special provisions for governance in Scheduled Areas under the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act override general disqualification norms, ensuring community-led decision-making and respecting tribal customs.

Headnote:

(A) Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 - Sections 7, 8, 54-1A, and 54C - Disqualification of Sarpanch - Collector declared petitioner disqualified for failing to conduct meetings for 90 days - Special provisions for Scheduled Areas under Chapter III-A must be considered - Non-obstante clause in Section 54-1A gives overriding effect to special provisions - Disqualification norms cannot be rigidly applied in Scheduled Areas - Collector's order quashed. (Paras 2, 10, 21, 24)

(B) Constitutional protections - Scheduled Tribes - Governance in Scheduled Areas must respect traditions and customs - Legislative intent is to allow community-led decision-making without rigid disqualification norms. (Paras 11, 19)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, elected as Sarpanch of Bilawali Gram Panchayat, was disqualified by the Collector for not convening meetings for 90 days, despite being a member of a Scheduled Tribe in a Scheduled Area. (Paras 3, 4)

Findings of Court:
The Collector's order was found to be a jurisdictional error as it failed to apply the special provisions of Chapter III-A, which do not prescribe disqualification for failure to convene meetings. (Paras 21, 22)

Issues: The main issues were whether the Collector could disqualify the petitioner under Section 7 given the special provisions applicable to Scheduled Areas and the interpretation of Section 54C. (Paras 10, 12)

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the special provisions in Chapter III-A prevail over general disqualification norms, emphasizing the need for a contextual interpretation that respects the governance framework in Scheduled Areas. (Paras 14, 23)

Result: The impugned order dated 27 March 2025 is quashed and the petitioner is restored to the position of Sarpanch. (Paras 24, 26)

JUDGMENT :

AMIT BORKAR, J.

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith.

2. Challenge in the present petition is to the legality and validity of the order dated 27 March 2025 passed by the Collector, Palghar in a proceeding initiated under Section 7 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as “the 1959 Act”). By the said order, the Collector allowed the application filed by respondent No.3 and declared the petitioner – who was elected as Sarpanch of the Bilawali Gram Panchayat – disqualified to continue as Sarpanch on the ground of failure to conduct any meeting for a continuous period of 90 days during the financial year 2024–2025.

3. The factual background of the case is not much in dispute and can be briefly stated thus: the Gram Panchayat of village Bilawali, situated in Taluka Wada, District Palghar, is notified as a Scheduled Area under the Presidential Notification dated 2nd December 1986 issued under Article 244(1) read with the Fifth Schedule to the Constitution of India. It is not disputed that the petitioner belongs to the Varli tribe, which is recognized as a Scheduled Tribe under the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order.

4. The election to the Bilawali Gram Panchayat was conducted on 17th October 2022, in which the petitioner came to be elected as Sarpanch. On 5th July 2024, respondent No.3 filed an application under Section 7(1) of the 1959 Act before the Collector, alleging that the petitioner had failed to convene the Gram Sabha within a period of two months from the beginning of the financial year and had not held any meeting for a continuous period of 90 days. The application sought a declaration that the petitioner stood disqualified under Sections 7 and 8 of the Act.

5. Upon issuance of notice, the petitioner contested the proceedings and filed his reply before the Collector. However, by the impugned order dated 27th March 2025, the Collector allowed the said application and declared the petitioner disqualified under the aforesaid provisions.

6. Learned Advocate for the petitioner has strenuously urged that the impugned order passed by the Collector suffers from jurisdictional infirmity as well as non-application of mind to the special constitutional and statutory protections granted to Scheduled Areas and their governance through local self-government institutions.

7. In this regard, reliance is placed on the provisions of Chapter III-A of the 1959 Act, which was inserted by Maharashtra Act No. 27 of 2003, to give effect to the provisions of Part IX of the Constitution as modified by the Fifth Schedule, read with PESA (Panchayats Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996. The said Chapter contains special provisions for the functioning of Gram Sabhas and Panchayats in Scheduled Areas.

8. Section 54-1A of the 1959 Act is particularly relevant and reads thus:

“Section 54-1A. Special Provisions relating to village and Gram Sabha – Notwithstanding anything contained in Sections 4, 5 or any other provisions of this Act, in the Scheduled Areas — (a) a habitation or a group of habitations or a hamlet or a group of hamlets comprising a community and managing its affairs in accordance with traditions and customs, and which is declared as a village in the prescribed manner shall be the village for the purposes of this Chapter; (b) every village, so declared under clause (a), shall have a Gram Sabha consisting of persons whose names are included in the electoral rolls for the panchayat at the village level and a panchayat may comprise of one or more than one of such villages.”

9. The use of the non-obstante clause in Section 54-1A is significant. It gives an overriding effect to the special provisions in Chapter III-A over any inconsistent provisions in the rest of the Act. The object and purpose of enacting such special provisions is to recognize and respect the distinct socio-cultural and administrative framework prevailing in Scheduled Areas. It mandates governance by traditions and customs of th

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