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

2005 Supreme(MP) 444

2005(2) JLJ 178
(FULL BENCH)
Dipak Misra, A.K. Mishra and A.K. Shrivastava, JJ.
Than Singh and others v. State of M.P.
Writ Petition No. 1573,2046 and 2495 of 2001; against the order reported in 2001(2) Vidhi Bhasvar 5;
Decided on 30.3.2005.

Advocates:
Rajendra Tiwari, J.K. Lodhi and Mohammed Kasim for petitioners;
S.K. Yadav, Government Advocate for State.

Headnote:(1) Pane hay at Raj Evam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 (M.P.) -- S. 6(2) (as inserted in 2001)-- Constitution of India -- Art. 14 -quorum -- purpose of -- is to safeguard against apprehension of miniscale members taking a decision even though a large number of members are unaware of the decision -- second limb of section 6(2) is violating mandate of Art. 14 of the Constitution.

       The present reference has arisen in a different factual matrix inasmuch as certain provisions of Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Evam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 (for brevity ‘the Act‘) that were incorporated by way of amendment into the aforesaid statute faced assail pertaining to their constitutional validity in the case of Jankidas Bairagi and another v. State of M.P., [2001(2) Vidhi Bhasvar 5 = 2001(2) MPHT 229], wherein a Division Bench declared the provisions under attack as constitutionally valid and dismissed the writ petition in limine, and thereafter when the present writ petition was filed challenging the enactment, the same Division Bench issued notice and when the matter was placed for final hearing, the Bench hearing the matter recorded a finding that the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners had a sanguine grievance with regard to a singular provision and had no cavil in respect of any other provision and accordingly thought it condign to recommend the matter to be referred to a larger Bench and resultantly, the matter has been placed before us for adjudication in respect of the question which is as under:

       "Whether the provision of sub-section (2) of section 6 of the Panchayat (Amendment) Act, 2001 is constitutionally valid ?" [Para 1

       Held: It is to be borne in mind, the purpose of the quorum is to ensure that there is proper transaction of business and the decision taken epitomises the representative character. In the instant provision, the representative character of the decision is likely to be caged. It is not out of place to state that concept of quorum is basically a safeguard against ~he apprehension that a minuscule persons or members may boast of having taken a decision on behalf of the body even though the large body of members are unaware or not parties to the decision. The quint essentiality of quorum is on the number and not on the constitution of the number which in the ultimate eventuality destroys the rationality, the reasonableness and ushers in arbitrariness. It has to be appreciated that all members who are members of the Gram Sabha are persons without any distinction or colour attached to them and they participate in the meeting of the body without any kind of distinction. There can be no differentiation in individual characteristic of a member and a member of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe for the purpose of a quorum in a meeting since quorum is only a guarantee of minimum number of persons from amongst the effective body which has the same homogeneous character qua such members. A provision like the present one unmistakably makes a distinction between two similar members. It is worth noting, after an election is held in respect of the Panchayat and all the elected members constitute a homogeneous group and no distinction is formed or introduced which is dependent upon the constituency or source of membership. They are all treated as equals, but the present provision while laying down that the quorum would have one-third women, and such proportionate members of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes to constitute mandatorily the one-fifth of members, treats equals as unequals violating the mandate of Article 14 of the Constitution. In fact, such members become more important members than other members without a rational basis and have the effect potentiality to take the majority to ransom as a consequence of which the majority decision paves the path of marginalization and in a way, extinction. The representative character of the decision becomes an anathema to its basic concept. Judged from these spectrums, there can be no iota of doubt, the second limb of the provision is not rested on reasonableness and in fact, smacks of arbitrariness in its conceptual eventuality. 2001(2) Vidhi Bhasvar 5 overruled. [Para 27

       (2) Panchayat Raj Evam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 (M.P.)-- S. 6(2) (as inserted in 2001) -- Constitution of India -- Arts. 15(3), 15(4), 243, 243A, 243B, 243D, 243G and 243H -- second limb of S. 6(2) --not saved under Arts. 15(3) and 15(G) -- Arts. 243 and others do not provide constitution of quorum of specific number of women and members of SC and ST -- part of section may be declared as ultra vires.

       We are of the considered view that both limbs of the provision are distinct and separate and after striking out what is invalid, what remains is in itself a complete provision independent of the rest and can be upheld notwithstanding the rest is constitutionally invalid. We are also of the opinion, the concept of quorum is the basic scheme when one-fifth of the members of Gram Sabha are taken into consideration and the constituents do not really form a part of an inseparable singular scheme. They are different in substance and if the invalid provision is expunged, the other part of the provision is workable, enforceable and has its own existence in a legitimate manner. Our view gets reinforced by the decision rendered in the case of R.M.D. Chamarhaugwalla and another v. Union of India and another [AIR 1957 SC 628].

        In view of our preceding analysis and studies, scrutiny on the foundation of prismatic premises, we conclude and hold the second limb of section 6(2) of the Act intending that ‘out of which not less than one third shall be women members and members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes shall be represented in proportion to their population in the Gram Sabha‘ is unconstitutional. AIR 1957 SC 628 followed. 2001(2) Vidhi Bhasvar 5 overruled. [Paras 44, 45 & 46

       (3) Constitution of India--Art. 15(3) and 15(4) -- provisions -enable the Legislature to make special provisions for women, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes -- permit protective discrimination -- but the said provisions have to stand the test of reasonability. AIR 1994 SC 544, AIR 1999 SC 2894, 1994 Supp. (1) SCC 324, (2001) 1 SCC 475, (2002) 6 SCC 562, (2003) 8 SCC 440 and (2005) 1 SCC 394 followed. [Para 9

       (4) Constitution of India--Art. 14 -- concept of equality before law -- does not involve idea of absolute equality amongst all -- it may be a physical impossibility -- guarantee is of similar treatment and not identical treatment. (2002) 4 SCC 34 and JT 2004(1) SC 152 followed. [Para 22

       (5) Words and Phrases--word ‘quorum‘ -- in its general sense, is a tenn denoting the number of members of any body of persons. Encyclopedia Britannica relied on. [Para 37

       (6) Words and Phrases -- word ‘quorum‘ -- now in common use is from Latin -- has come to signify such a number of officers or members as is competent by law to be constituted to transact business. Corpus Juris Secundum Vol. LXXIV relied on. [Para 38

       (7) Words and Phrases--word ‘quorum‘--denotes minimum number of members to transect business validly. AIR 1976 SC 1441 followed. [Para 39

       ¼1½ iapk;r jkt ,oa xzke Lojkt vf/kfu;e] 1993 ¼e-ç-½& &/kkjk 6¼2½ ¼lu~ 2001 esa ;Fkk var%LFkkfir½& &Hkkjr dk lafo/kku& &vuq-14&x.kiwfrZ&dk ç;kstu&bl vk‘kadk ds fo#) j{kksik; gS fd lnL;ksa dh NksVh&lh la[;k }kjk fofu‘p;u fd;k tk,] Hkys gh lnL;ksa dh cM+h la[;k ml fofu‘p; ls vufHkK gks&/kkjk 6¼2½ ds f}rh; Hkkx ls lafo/kku ds vuq-14 dh vkKk dk vfrØe.k gksrk gSA

       çLrqr funs‘k fHkUu rF;kRed i`"BHkwfe ls mnHkwr gqvk gS D;ksafd e/; çns‘k iapk;r jkt ,oa xzke Lojkt vf/kfu;e] 1993 ¼la{ksi ds fy, ^vf/kfu;e*½ esa la‘kks/ku ds ek/;e ls lekfo"V iwoksZDr dkuwu ds dfri; mica/kksa dks tkudhnkl cSjkxh rFkk ,d vU; fo-e-ç- jkT; ¿2001¼2½ fof/k HkkLoj 5&2001 ¼2½ ,e ih ,p Vh 229À ds ekeys esa viuh lkafo/kkfud fof/kekU;rk ds laca/k esa vk{ksi dk lkeuk djuk iM+kA mDr ekeys esa [kaM U;k;ihB us vkf{kIr mica/kksa dks lafo/kkfud :i ls fof/kekU; ?kksf"kr fd;k rFkk fjV ;kfpdk vkjaHk esa [kkfjt dj nhA rRi‘pkr~ tc mlh vf/kfu;fefr ij vk{ksi djrs gq, çLrqr fjV ;kfpdk Qkby dh xbZ rc mlh [kaM U;k;ihB us lwpuk tkjh dh vkSj tc ekeyk vafre lquokbZ ds fy, j[kk x;k rc ekeys dh lquokbZ djus okyh U;k;ihB us fu"d"kZ vfHkfyf[kr fd;k fd ;kphx.k dh vksj ls milatkr fo}ku dkmUlsy dks ,d fo‘ks"k mica/k ds ckjs esa xaHkhj f‘kdk;r gS rFkk fdlh vU; mica/k ds ckjs esa dksbZ vkifRrÙk ugha gS rFkk rnuqlkj ekeyk c`gÙkj U;k;ihB dks funsZf‘kr djus dh flQjkf‘k djuk lehphu le>k x;kA ifj.kkeLo:i] gekjs le{k ekeyk ml ç‘u ds U;k;fu.kZ;u ds fy, j[kk x;k gS tks fuEukuqlkj gS%

       ^^D;k iapk;r ¼la‘kks/ku½ vf/kfu;e] 2001 dh /kkjk 6 dh mi/kkjk ¼2½ dk mica/k lkafc/kfudr% fof/kekU; gS\** ¼iSjk 1½

       vfHkfu/kkZfjr % ;g /;ku esa j[kk tkuk gksxk fd x.kiwfrZ dk ç;kstu ;g lqfuf‘pr fd;k tkuk gS fd dkedkt dk lapkyu leqfpr :i ls gksrk gS rFkk fd;k x;k fofu‘p; çfrfuf/kd çÑfr dk çrhd gSA çLrqr mica/k esa laHkkfor gS fd fofu‘p; dh çfrfuf/k çÑfr lhfer gks tk,A ;g dguk vçklafxd ugha gS fd vk/kkjHkwr :i ls] x.kiwfrZ dh ladYiuk bl vk‘kadk ds fo#) j{kksik; gS fd O;fDr;ksa ;k lnL;ksa dh NksVh&lh la[;k }kjk fudk; dh vksj ls fofu‘p;u djus dh Mhax gk¡dh tk,] Hkys gh lnL; dh cM+h la[;k fofu‘p; ls vufHkK gks ;k mlesa çfrHkkxh ugha gksA x.kiwfrZ dk lkjro la[;k gS] la[;k dk xBu ugha ftlls var esa rkfdZdrk vkSj ;qfDr;qDrrk u‘V gksrh gS vkSj euekuh çkjaHk gksrh gSA ;g le>uk gksxk fd xzke lHkk ds leLr lnL; ,sls O;fDr gS ftuls dksbZ oSf’k"V~; ;k Nn~ekHkkl tqM+k ugha gksrk rFkk og fudk; ds lfEeyu esa fdlh Hkh çHksn ds fcuk Hkkx ysrs gSaA lfEeyu esa xw.kiwfrZ ds ç;kstu ds fy, fdlh Hkh lnL; ds vkSj vuqlwfpr tkfr rFkk vuqlwfpr tutkfr ds lnL; ds oS;fDrd oSf’k"V~; esa Hksn ugha fd;k tk ldrk D;ksafd x.kiwfrZ ,sls çHkkoh fudk; ls] ftlds lnL;ksa dh gSfl;r le:i çÑfr dh gksrh gS] O;fDr;ksa dh U;wure la[;k dh xkjaVh ek= gSA çLrqr mica/k tSls mica/k ls le:i nks lnL; Li"Vr% lqfHkUu gks tkrs gSaA /;ku nsus ;ksX; ckr gS fd iapk;r ds laca/k esa fuokZpu gks tk,¡ rFkk leLr fuokZfpr lnL;ksa }kjk le:i lewb xfBr gks tk, rc ,slh fHkUurk xfBr ;k iqj%LFkkfir ugha gksrh tks lnL;rk ds fuokZpu {ks= ;k L=ksr ij vk/kkfjr gksA mu lHkh dks leku ekuk tkrk gS] ijarq çLrqr mica/k esa ;g vf/kdfFkr dj fd x.kiwfrZ ds ,d&frgkbZ fL=;k¡ gksaxh rFkk vuqlwfpr tkfr;ksa] vuqlwfpr tutkfr;ksa ds ,sls vkuqikfrd lnL; gksaxs fd vkKkid :i ls lnL;ksa dk ik¡pok Hkkx xfBr gks] leku yksxksa dks vleku ekuk x;k gS ftlls lafo/kku ds vuqPNsn 14 dh vkKk dk vfrØe.k gksrk gSA okLro esa] ,sls lnL; fdlh Hkh rkfdZd vk/kkj ds fcuk vU; lnL;ksa ls vf/kd egRoiw.kZ lnL; cu tkrs gSa rFkk mUgsa cgqer dh dk;Zokgh ugha djus nsus dh çHkkoh ‘kfDr çkIr gks tkrh gS ftlds ifj.kkeLo:i cgqer dk fofu‘p; gkf‘k, ij vk tkrk gS vkSj ,d çdkj ls yqIr gks tkrk gSA fofu‘p; dh çfrfuf/kd çÑfr viuh vk/kkjHkwr ladYiuk ds fy, vfHk‘kki cu tkrh gSA bl n`f"V ls] ys‘kek= Hkh lansg ugha gks ldrk fd mica/k dk f}rh; Hkkx ;qfDr;qDrrk ij vk/kkfjr ugha gS rFkk okLro esa mlls mldh ladYiukRed laHkkO;rk esa euekuh dh xa/k vkrh gSA 2001¼2½ fof/k HkkLoj 5 myVk x;kA ¼iSjk 27½

       ¼2½ iapk;r jkt ,oa xzke Lojkt vf/kfu;e] 1993 ¼e-ç-½& &/kkjk 6¼2½ ¼lu~ 2001 esa ;Fkk var%LFkkfir½&Hkkjr dk lafo/kku&vuq- 15¼3½] 15¼4½] 243] 243d] 243[k 243?k] 243N rFkk 243t&/kkjk 6¼2½ dk f}rh; Hkkx&vuq-15¼3½ rFkk 15¼4½ ds v/khu O;ko`Ùk ugha& &vuq-243 rFkk vU; esa fL=;ksa rFkk v-tk- vkSj v-t- ds lnL;ksa dh fofufnZ"V la[;k }kjk x.kiwfrZ dk xBu micaf/kr ugha&/kkjk Hkkxr% vf/kdkjkrhr ?kksf"kr dh tk ldrh gSA

       gekjh lqfopkfjr jk; gS fd mica/k ds nksuksa Hkkx lqfHkUu vkSj i`Fkd~ gSa rFkk tks vfof/kekU; gS mls dkVus ds i‘pkr tks ‘ks"k jgrk gS og ckdh lc ls Lora=] Lo;aiw.kZ mica/k gS rFkk mls bl ckr ds gksrs gq, Hkh fd ‘ks"k lc lakfo/kkfudr% vfof/kekU; gS] ekU; Bgjk;k tk ldrk gSA gekjh ;g jk; Hkh gS fd tc xzke lHkk ds lnL;ksa ds ik¡posa Hkkx ij fopkj fd;k tk jgk gS rc vk/kkjHkwr ;kstuk x.kiwfrZ dh gS] rFkk mlds ¼mica/k ds½ la?kVd okLro esa vi`Fkdj.kh;] lkjr% fHkUu gS rFkk ;fn vfof/kekU; mica/k gVk fn;k tkrk gS rc mica/k dk vU; Hkkx O;kogkfjd] çorZuh; gS rFkk mldk fof/klaxr jhfr ls viuk Lo;a dk vfLrRo gSA gekjs n`f"Vdks.k dks vkj-,e-Mh- pejckxokyk rFkk vU; fo- Hkkjr la?k rFkk ,d vU; ¿, vkb vkj 1957 ,l lh 628À ds ekeys esa fn, x, fofu‘p; ls cy çkIr gksrk gSA

       gekjs iwoZxkeh fo‘ys‘k.k vkS v/;;u] leik‘ohZ; vk/kkjksa ij laoh{kk dh n`f"V ls] gekjk fu"d"kZ gS rFkk ge vfHkfu/kkZfjr djrs gSa fd vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 6¼2½ dk f}rh; Hkkx] vFkkZr~ ^^ftlesa ls ,d&frgkbZ ls vU;wu efgyk lnL; gksaxh vkSj vuqlwfpr tkfr vkSj vuqlwfpr tutkfr ds lnL;ksa dk çfrfuf/kRo xzke lHkk esa mudh tula[;k ds vuqikr esa gksxk**] vlaoS/kkfud gSA , vkb vkj 1957 ,l lh 628 vuqlfjrA 2001¼2½ fof/k HkkLoj 5 myVk x;kA ¼iSjk 44] 45 ,oa 46½

       ¼3½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku& &vuq- 15¼3½ rFkk 15¼4½& &mica/k& &fo/kku&eaMy dks fL=;ksa] vuqlwfpr tkfr;ksa vkSj vuqlwfpr tutkfr;ksa ds fy, fo‘ks"k mica/k cukus esa leFkZ fd;k x;k gS& &laj{k.kkRed foHksn vuqKkr& &ijarq mDr mica/kksa dks ;qfDr;qDrrk dh dlkSVh ij [kjk mrjuk vko‘;d gSA , vkb vkj 1994 ,l lh 544] , vkb vkj 1999 ,l lh 2894] 1994 lIyh] ¼1½ ,l lh lh 324] ¼2001½ 1 ,l lh lh 475] ¼2002½ 6 ,l lh lh 562] ¼2003½ 8 ,l lh lh 440 rFkk ¼2005½ 1 ,l lh lh 394 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 9½

       ¼4½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku& &vuq-14& &fof/k ds le{k lekurk dh ladYiuk&lHkh esa vkR;afrd lekurk dk fopkj varoZfyr ugha& &,slk gksuk HkkSfrd vlaHkkO;rk gks ldrk gS&xkjaVh leku O;ogkj dh gS] fcYdqy mlh O;ogkj dh ughaA ¼2002½ 4 ,l lh lh 34 rFkk ts Vh 2004¼1½ ,l lh 152 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 22½

       ¼5½ ‘‘kCn rFkk okD;&‘‘kCn ^x.kiwfrZ*&lk/kkj.k vFkZ esa bl in ls O;fDr;ksa ds fdlh fudk; ds lnL;ksa dh la[;k |ksfrr gSA ,UlkbDyksihfM;k fczVSfudk voyafcrA ¼iSjk 37½

       ¼6½ ‘‘kCn okD; okD;& &‘‘kCn ^dksje* ¼x.kiwfrZ½&vc lkekU; ç;ksx esa&ySfVu Hkk"kk dk ‘‘kCn gS&vf/kdkfj;ksa ;k lnL;ksa dh ,slh la[;k dk vFkZ gks x;k gS ftldk dkedkt ds lapkyu ds fy, xfBr fd;k tkuk fof/k esa l{ke gSaA dkiZl T;wfjl lsdaMe [kaM 74 voyafcrA ¼iSjk 38½

       ¼7½ ‘‘kCn rFkk okD;& &‘‘kCn ^x.kiwfrZ*& &fof/kekU;r% dkedkt ds lapkyu ds fy, lnL;ksa dh U;wure la[;k |ksfrr gSA , vkb vkj 1976 ,l lh 1441 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 39½

ORDER

Misra, J.--1. The present reference has arisen in a different factual matrix inasmuch as certain provisions of Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Evam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 (for brevity 'the Act') that were incorporated by way of amendment into the aforesaid statute faced assail pertaining to their constitutional validity in the case of Jankidas Bairagi and another v. State of M.P., [2001(2) Vidhi Bhasvar 5 =2001(2) MPHT 229], wherein a Division Bench declared the provisions under attack as constitutionally valid and dismissed the writ petition in limine, and thereafter when the present writ petition was filed challenging the enactment, the same Division Bench issued notice and when the matter was placed for final hearing, the Bench hearing the matter recorded a finding that the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners had a sanguine grievance with regard to a singular provision and had no cavil in respect of any other provision and accordingly thought it condign to recommend the matter to be referred to a larger Bench and resultantly, the matter has been placed before us for adjudication in respect of the question which is as under:

"Whether the provision of sub-section (2) of section 6 of the Panchayat (Amendment) Act, 2001 is Constitutionally valid ?"

2. To appreciate the controversy in proper perspective it is seemly to state that Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj (Samshodhan) Adhiniyam, 2001 was enacted by the State Legislature and received assent of the Governor on 21.1.2001 and published in the Madhya Pradesh Gazette (Extraordinary) on 22.1.2001. The constitutional validity of the said enactment was challenged in the case of Jankidas Bairaghi (supra) which was decided by a Division Bench on 22.3.2001. After referring to certain provisions of the Act the Division Bench in paragraphs 5 to 7 expressed the view as under:

"5. The contentions that these provisions clash with powers, functions and responsibilities of the Gram Panchayat, are, therefore, unsustainable. Both the institutions aim at serving the people under their jurisdiction, which is not possible without an entrustment of functions, facilities and funds. The statutory provisions enumerated above, look after his requirement, they do not destroy the existence and utility of Gram Panchayat which performs distinct functions kept apart by section 49 of the Panchayat (Samshodhan) Adhiniyam, 2001 and section 49-A of the M.P. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993. Therefore, apprehensions that Gram Panchayat would be denuded of its responsibility and utility, have no basis and are liable to be rejected.

6. Proper reading of various provisions of the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 and Panchayat (Samshodhan) Adhiniyam, 2001, would clearly demonstrate that challenges against the validity of some of sections raised by the petitioners have no substance. Since Gram Sabhas at the village level are being constituted for the first time, some of the functions at village level are going to be performed by it. There is a feeling of alienation and apprehension as to the role by Gram Panchayat, but look at the real substance of the functions, would make it clear that they are constituted for discharging well defined functions in different areas. The contention that since the Gram Sabha comprised of none elected persons, therefore, it would not be fit to operate the funds placed at its disposal whereas Gram Panchayat has elected members, therefore, elected persons would be fit to handle fund, cannot be accepted. Neither there is presumption that only elected persons are fit to manage financial matters nor it can be so said. Gram Sabha has separate funds like Gram Panchayat. From the statement of objects and reasons, it is crystal c1ear that object for constituting Gram Sabha is to enable people at the village level to pm1icipate in development of the village with respect to matters of their concern and interest and with a view to discharge them, the Gram Kosh has been established and power to















































































































































































































































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