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

2015 Supreme(All) 1184

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : ARUN TANDON AND ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, JJ.
SURESH JAISWAL ....Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER ....Respondents
(Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 53941 of 2015 connected with Civil Misc. Writ Petition Nos. 53854, 54042, 54057, 54074, 53845, 53978, 54066, 54225, 54094, 54291, 54253, 54268, 54398, 54400, 54407, 54423, 54425, 54411, 54435, 54455, 54503, 54549, 54589, 54612, 54606, 54620, 54625, 54627, 54643, 54655, 54666, 54710, 54752, 54756, 55455, 55408, 55436, 55525, 55561, 55552, 55562, 55551, 55575, 55210, 55230, 55275, 55274, 55269, 55305, 55308, 55318 and 55657 of 2015, decided on 29th September, 2015)

Advocates:
Counsel :
S.K. Singh Paliwal, Shashi Nandan, Krishan Ji Khare, Satish Kumar Tyagi, J.H. Khan, Imran Khan, W.H. Khan, P.N. Tripathi, Shashwat Shukla, Sanjay Kumar, Alok Sharma, Anubhav Chandra, Gautam Chaudhary, Namit Srivastava, M.C. Chaturvedi, Parul Srivastava, Sengar Vineet Singh, Gaurav Tiwari, P.C. Pandey, S.K. Mishra, Hari Pratap Gupta, Gajala Srivastava, Manish, Nipun Singh, Anurag Khanna, Dr. Manoj Dubey, Sudhir Dixit, Rishi Kant Rai, Mahipal Singh, Prashant Kumar Singh, S.Q. Khan, Meraj Ahmad Khan, Santosh Kumar Singh, Rajesh Kumar Dubey, Om Prakash Pandey, Shamshad Ahmad, Gulab Chandra, Santosh K. Srivastava, D.C. Yadav, R.N. Singh, Vishal Kashyap, P.N. Tripathi, K.M. Asthana, Ram Mohan, Anil Kumar Aditya, Udayan Nandan, Arif Ikbal, Rajesh Gupta, S.N. Srivastava, Ramesh Chandra Tripathi, Satendra Pratap Singh, K.D. Tiwari, B.D. Mishra, Slok Dwivedi, Ajai Kumar Srivastava, J.P. Singh, R.P.S Chauahn, Rajesh Kumar Singh, Satish Chand, Ghanshyam Dwivedi, S. Pratap Singh, J.P.N. Singh, P.N. Saxena, Akhilesh Kumar Ojha, Dr. D.K. Tiwari, Shashi Kant Kushwaha, P.N. Kushwaha, A.K. Malviya, A.L. Yadav, S.K. Nigam, J.P. Singh, Rama Nand Pandey, Pradeep Narayan Pandey, Pavan Kishore, Piyush Srivastav, Sudhir Dixit, Anupam Shyam Dwivedi, Chandra Bhushan Yadav and Kirtikar Pande for the Petitioner; C.S.C., Tarun Agrawal, Tahira Kazmi, S.I. Siddiqui, S.N. Ahmad, V.K. Dixit, Chhaya Gupta, K.P. Singh for the Respondents.

Headnote:Constitution of India, 1950—Part IX, Articles 243-B, 243-O, 226 and 32—U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947—Sections 9 and 12—U.P. Kshettra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Adhiniyam, 1961—Sections 18 and 18-B(2)—Zila Panchayat—Constitution of—Issuance of notification—Scope—Notification for election of Zila Panchayat issued—Challenge against reservation of seats for elections—Delimitation, reservation of seats, principle of rotation—Whether judicial review under Article 226 could be curtailed in view of the bar contained in Article 243-O?—Scope of interference with the electoral process?—Vires of Election laws vis-a-vis reservation of seats. [Paras 17 to 25]

       Result; Referred to Larger Bench.

       

JUDGMENT

By the Court.—State of Uttar Pradesh has initiated process for holding of elections of Panchayats assigned constitutional recognition under Part-IX introduced by Constitutional 73rd Amendment Act, 1992. Article 243-B, falling in Part-IX of the Constitution provides for constituting in every State Panchayat at the village level intermediate level and district level. State of U.P. had already enacted U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act of 1947’) as well as U.P. Kshettra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Adhiniyam, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Adhiniyam of 1961’), for the purposes of establishing Panchayats and these enactments came to be amended vide U.P. Act No. 9 of 1994 so as to bring them in conformity with the provisions of Part IX of the Constitution. Rules have also been framed by the State under the Act of 1947 and Adhiniyam of 1961 for the purposes of holding of elections.

2. Delimitation/creation of constituencies, reservation of seats, principle of rotation to be applied etc. have all been provided under the Acts and Rules. Government order from time to time have also been issued for the purposes. For the elections to be held in 2015, a Government order dated 11.8.2015 has been issued modifying the previous Government order dated 9.7.2010 in the matter of reservation of seats. It is at this stage that these bunch of writ petitions came to be filed by different petitioners, challenging the manner and methodology followed by the State in holding of Panchayat elections on the ground that the same are in violation of the constitutional provisions, as well as the provisions of the Acts and Rules so that the very holding of elections is rendered farce. This Court proceeded to entertain these writ petition and the grievances of the petitioners were being examined within the limits of self-imposed restriction to be exercised in matter of elections by a writ Court. Following orders came to be passed by us in leading writ petition No. 53941 of 2015 on 22.9.2015 :

“Petitioners in this bunch of petitions complain about gross infraction of the applicable provisions of the U.P. Kshetra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Adhiniyam, 1961 and Rules framed thereunder in holding of elections for Zila Panchayat. Violation of constitutional provisions contained in Part-IX are also alleged.

Reservation in respect of the seats of Zila Panchayat is provided for under Section 18-A of the U.P. Kshetra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Adhiniyam, 1961. Reservation under the said section is to be provided for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes. The section provides for the mechanics for determination of number of seats to be reserved in each category. After such determination takes place and the number of seats to be reserved for each category is determined under the said section, the issue of allotment of seats and offices for the reserved category comes into picture, and it is at this stage that the Uttar Pradesh Kshetra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat (Reservation and Allotment of Seats and Offices) Rules, 1994, applies. Therefore, it is first to be ascertained as to whether there has been determination of reservation of total seats of Zila Panchayat in accordance with Section 18-A, and if such reservation has been done, the details thereof must be furnished to the Court. After the said issue is examined, the Court would be required to examine as to whether the allocation of seats for the reserved category has been done in accordance with the Rules of 1994 or not.

Since the elections for the Kshetra Panchayats and Zila Panchayats have already been notified, we direct that this bunch of petitions shall continue on day-to-day basis. Standing Counsel is directed to summon all relevant records from the State Government, which may disclose the compliance of Section 18-A of the Adhiniyam of 1961 in the matter of determination of the number of post to be reserved and also to summon the original records from t










































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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