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

2021 Supreme(Guj) 150

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
BHARGAV D. KARIA, J.
Nathkuva Group Gram Panchayat – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
R/Special Civil Application No. 11448 of 2020
Decided on : 25-02-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : SHIVAM H CHOKSHI
For the Respondent: MR. K.M. ANTANI, MR HS MUNSHAW, adv.

Point of Law: Section 7 of Act, 1993 is only with regard to effective consultation with Gram Panchayat. Meaning thereby that if Gram Panchayat is not agreeable with merger then it is for State Government to decide by way of policy decision whether merger should be effected or not. Provision of section 7 of Act, 1993 does not stipulate that if Gram Panchayat is not agreeable for inclusion or exclusion of any area from its limits, then no competent authority is debarred from issuing notification in consonance with provisions of constitution of India as narrated above

Headnote:

Gujarat Panchayat Act, 1993 – Section 7 - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226, 243G and 243Q - Development Commissioner - Notification - Challenged - Gram Panchayat - Order passed by District Development Officer implementing notification whereby petitioner Gram Panchayat is divided into two Gram Panchayats - Case of petitioner that in spite of objection raised by petitioner, State Government issued notification separating Gram Panchayat from petitioner Gram Panchayat, which was implemented by District Development Officer by impugned order - Whether State Government, while exercising that power, rule of natural justice is required to be observed?

Finding of the court: It is almost settled law that an act legislative in character primary or subordinate, is not subjected to rule of natural justice. In case of legislative act of legislature, no question of application of rule of natural justice arises. However, in case of subordinate legislation, legislature may provide for observance of principle of natural justice or provide for hearing to the resident of area before making any declaration in regard to territorial area of a Gram Sabha and also before establishing a Gram Sabha for that area. We have come across many enactments where an opportunity of hearing has been provided for before any area is excluded from one Gram Sabha and included it in different Gram Sabhas or a local authority. However, it depends upon legislative wisdom and provisions of an enactment - It cannot be said that notification issued by State Government bifurcating petitioner gram panchayat into two gram panchayats is arbitrary, perverse and contrary to provisions of section 7 of Act, 1993 and as such impugned order which is passed to give effect to notification can not be interfered with in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India.

Result: Petition dismissed

ORDER :

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Shivam Chokshi for the petitioner, learned advocate Mr. H.S. Munshaw for the respondent nos.2 and 4 and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. K.M. Antani for the respondent no.1 – State through video conference. Though served, no one appears for the respondent no.3.

2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner – Nathkuva Group Gram Panchayat through its Sarpanch Nakliben Maheshbhai Rathwa has challenged the order dated 10th July, 2020 passed by the District Development Officer, Godhara implementing the notification dated 30th June, 2020 whereby the petitioner Gram Panchayat is divided into two Gram Panchayats i.e. (1) Nathkuva Group Gram Panchayat and (2) Kankodakoi Gram Panchayat of Ghoghamba Taluka, District Panchmahal.

3. According to the petitioner, the total population of Nathkuva Gram Panchayat is about 1800 persons and Nathkuva Gram Panchayat consists of two villages i.e. Nathkuva having 900 persons and Kankodakoi having 900 persons.

3.1 One Ranginsinh Salamsinh Solanki submitted an application before the Taluka Development Officer on 21st December, 2018 for separating the Kankodakoi village from Nathkuva Group Gram Panchayat without there being any consent of the members and signature of the petitioner – panchayat.

3.2 It appears that the Taluka Panchayat Ghoghamba in the meeting held on 23rd June, 2019 passed a Resolution no.92 to invite written application for separating Kankodakoi Gram Panchayat from the petitioner panchayat as the details were not complete. The petitioner panchayat raised an objection vide letter dated 2nd July, 2019 before the Taluka Development Officer (for short 'the TDO') contending that the application was made with signature of only one member of the panchayat with signature of few village persons. The TDO by letter dated 29th July, 2019 directed the petitioner to complete the irregularity in the application dated 21st December, 2018 along with the documents stated therein including the map, consent letter of the members of the gram panchayat, resolution etc. The petitioner panchayat, thereafter, addressed a letter dated 18th March, 2020 to the Development Commissioner raising objection with regard to the separation of Kankodakoi Gram Panchayat from the petitioner panchayat.

3.3. It is the case of the petitioner that in spite of the objection raised by the petitioner, the State Government issued the notification dated 30th June, 2020 separating the Kankodakoi Gram Panchayat from the petitioner Gram Panchayat, which was implemented by the District Development Officer by the impugned order dated 10th July, 2020. The petitioner has therefore, preferred this petition.

4. Learned advocate Mr. Choksi for the petitioner submitted that the provisions of Section 7 of the Gujarat Panchayat Act, 1993 (for short 'the Act, 1993') is not followed by the respondents and there is no effective consultation with the petitioner gram panchayat and therefore, the impugned order dated 10th July, 2020 is required to be quashed and set aside.

5. Learned advocate Mr. Munshaw appearing for the respondent nos.4 and 5 submitted that the petition is not maintainable as the petitioner panchayat is not in existence pursuant to the notification dated 30th June, 2020 issued by the State Government through its Panchayat Rural Housing and Rural Development Department, Gandhinagar bifurcating the Nathkuva Group Gram Panchayat into two panchayats i.e. Nathkuva Gram Panchayat and Kankodakoi Gram Panchayat and the administrator is appointed on 10th July, 2020, who has taken over the charge.

6. It was further submitted that the petitioner gram panchayat was constituted under the provisions of the Act, 1993 including the areas of Nathkuva village and Kankodakoi village and the population of both the villages is 1760 as per the census of 2011. It was further submitted that gram sabha of Nathkuva Group Gram Panchayat in the meeting held on 27th September, 2018 resol

    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