Back
1996 JLJ 335
A.K. Mathur, Ag. C.J. and S.C. Pandey, J.
Jagdish Prasad Bhunjwa v. State of M.P. and others
W.P. No. 3141 of 1995; Decided on 15.1.1996
The question before us is only regarding no-confidence motion against the Sarpanch that whether Sec. 21 is arbitrary or violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India or not. So far as providing the method of election and motion of no-confidence being passed is concerned, it is for the State Legislature to enact the law as this area has been left open by sub-clause (5) of Art. 243C and the reasons appeared to be that since the Gram Sabha is in the lowest in the heirarchy of the• three tier system, the Parliament has thought it proper that the State Legislature may legislate on this aspect looking to the geographical and physical condition of the area. The State Legislature in its wisdom thought it proper that for removal of the Sarpanch by vote of no-confidence shall be the proper by indirect method of being voted out by the elected Panchas. [Para 13
(2) Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (M.P.) -- S. 21 -- Constitution of India - Art. 14 -- provision under S. 21 of the Act -- not arbitrary simply because no confidance motion against surpanch is to be passed indirectly -- however, the competent body should consider the matter.
Simply because, an indirect method has been provided by the State Legislature, it cannot be said that it is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. It is for the State Legislature to consider that whether the Sarpanch who is directly elected should be removed by the elected Panchas i.e. by indirect method. It cannot be said that this method is bad or illegal as all the Panchas are also elected by the Gram Sabha only and they are supposed to represent the will of the voters of the Gram Sabha. AIR 1993 SC 2042 followed.
Before parting with this case, we would like to observe that matter needs to be examined by the Competent Body because it is more democratic to get the ratification of the no-confidence motion passed by the elected Sarpanch by the Gram Sabha. [Para 14
¼1½ iapk;r jkt vf/kfu;e] 1993 ¼e-ç-½ & /kkjk 21 & Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & vuq- 14 rFkk 243x ¼5½ & vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 21 ds v/khu mica/k & dsoy bl dkj.k euekus ugha dgs tk ldrs fd ljiap ds fo#) vfo‘okl çLrko iapk;r }kjk vçR;{k :i esa ikfjr fd;k tkuk gksrk gS & jkT; fo/kkueaMy bl fo"k; ij fo/kku cukus ds fy, vuq- 243x ¼5½ ds v/khu l‘kDr fd;k x;k gSA gekjs le{k ç‘u dsoy ljiap ds fo#) vfo‘okl ds çLrko ds ckjs esa gS fd /kkjk 21 euekuh vFkok lafo/kku ds vuq-14 dh vfrØe.kdkjh gS ;k ughaA tgk¡ rd fuokZpu vkSj fo‘okl çLrko ikfjr djus dh i)fr micaf/kr djus dk laca/k gS] ;g jkT; fo/kku eaMy }kjk fof/k vf/kfu;fer djus dh ckr gS D;ksafd ;g {ks= vuq-243x ds mi[kaM ¼5½ }kjk [kqyk NksM+k x;k gS vkSj bldk dkj.k ;g çrhr gksrk gS fd D;ksafd xzke lHkk f=Lrjh; ç.kkyh ds Øe esa lc ls uhps gS] yksdlHkk us ;g mfpr le>k fd jkT; fo/kku eaMy {ks= dh HkkSxksfyd vkSj çkÑfrd n‘kk dks ns[krs gq, bl igyw ij fo/kku cuk ldsxhA jkT; fo/kku eaMy us vius çKku esa ;g mfpr le>k fd ljiap dks vfo‘okl er ls gVkus ds fy, fuokZfpr iapksa ds erksa ls gVk, tkus dh i)fr mfpr gksxhA ¿iSjk 13 ¼2½ iapk;r jkt vf/kfu;e] 1993 ¼e-ç-½ & /kkjk 21 & Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & vuq-14 & vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 21 ds v/khu mica/k & dsoy bl dkj.k euekuk ugha gSa fd ljiap ds fo#) vfo‘okl vçR;{k :i ls ikfjr fd;k tkuk gksxk & rFkkfi] l{ke fudk; dks bl fo"k; ij fopkj djuk pkfg,A dsoy bl dkj.k fd jkT; fo/kku eaMy }kjk vçR;{k i)fr micaf/kr dh xbZ gS] ;g ugha dgk tk ldrk fd ;g lafo/kku ds vuq- 14 dh vfrØe.kdkjh gSA ;g jkT; fo/kku eaMy }kjk fopkj fd, tkus dh ckr gS fd D;k og ljiap tks çR;{k :i ls fuokZfpr gqvk gS] fuokZfpr iapksa }kjk vFkkZr vçR;{k i)fr ls gVk;k tk,A ;g ugha dgk tk ldrk fd ;g i)fr nks"kiw.kZ vFkok voS/k gS D;ksafd leLr iap Hkh xzke lHkk }kjk gh fuokZfpr fd, tkrs gSa vkSj xzke lHkk ds ernkrkvksa dh bPNk dk çfrfuf/kRo fd;k tkuk muls visf{kr gSA , vkb vkj 1993 ,l lh 2042 vuqlfjrA bl ekeys dks NksM+us ds iwoZ ge leqfDr djuk pkgsaxs fd bl fo"k; ij l{ke fudk; }kjk fopkj fd, tkus dh vko‘;drk gS D;ksafd ljiap ds fo#) fuokZfpr iapksa }kjk ikfjr vfo‘okl çLrko ij xzke lHkk dk vuqleFkZu çkIr fd;k tkuk vf/kd yksdrkaf=d gSA ¿iSjk 14
A. K. Mathur, Ag. C.J.--1. All the aforesaid writ petitions involve common question of law; therefore, they are disposed of by this common order.
2. For convenient disposal of all these writ petitions, the facts given in Jagdish Prasad Bhunjwa v. State of M.P. & others (WP 3141/95) are taken into consideration.
3. The petitioner in the aforesaid writ petition, has challenged the validity of section 21 of the M.P. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1994, and have also challenged the motion of no-confidence against the elected Sarpanch and Upsarpanch being unjust, unreasonable, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
4. The brief facts giving rise to this petition are thus : The petitioner was elected as Sarpanch directly by the voters of Gram Panchayat-Arkandi, Tehsil-Maihar, District-Satna as provided under section 17 of the M.P. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1994'). It is alleged that under sub-section (1) of section 17 of the said Act, a Sarpanch is to be elected by the persons whose names are included in the list of voters of Gram Panchayat. Therefore, as per the provisions, the petitioner was elected directly as Sarpanch by the voters of the Gram Panchayat-Arkandi. Likewise, there is a provision under section 17 (5) of the Act, Up-Sarpanch is to be elected from amongst the elected Panchas. Thus, the election of Up-Sarpanch is indirect and is to be elected by the Panchas whereas the election of sarpanch is direct and is to be elected by the voters of the Gram Panchayat. It is alleged that under section 21 of the Act, motion of no confidence against the Sarpanch and Upsarpanch is to be passd by the elected Panchas by a resolution passed by majority of not less than three fourth of the Panchas present and voting and such majority is more than two third of the total members of Panchas constituting the Gram Panchayat for the time being. A notice was issued on 4.9.1995 by the respondent-Sub Divisional Officer calling for the meeting of the Gram Panchayat for consideration of no confidence motion, which was moved by 7 Panchas. The meeting was fixed on 11.9.1995. It is alleged that some representations were made that the Sarpanch has been elected directly by voters therefore, vote of no confidence cannot be considered by the elected Panchas of the Gram Panchayat. It is alleged that the voters of the village-Arkandi requested that the petitioner should continue as Sarpanch for five years. But it is submitted that the total voters of the village-Arkandi is about 554 and out of which a memorandum was signed by 387 voters. A meeting of the Gram Panchayat which was convened by the Sub-Divisional Officer, was adjourned for the reason that the notice was issued on 11.9.1995 by the respondent S.D.O. adjourning the meeting and further directed the Secretary of the Gram Panchayat for issuance of fresh notice as per Rules. Therefore, the petitioner has filed this petition challenging the validity of section 21 of the Act.
5. The principal submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners in all the batch of petitions is that once the Sarpanch has been declared elected directly then he cannot be removed by way of no confidence motion through the elected Panch as i.e. directly elected Sarpanch cannot be removed by Panchas by indirect method of passing of no confidence by the elected Panchas of the Gram Panchayat. It is also submitted that the constitution does not provide the right to recall except as provided under other provisions of the Act; therefore, section 21 of the Act is ultra-vires, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It is submitted that Article 243 of the Constitution, there is no provision for recalling any panch; therefore, section 21 of the Act is also violative of Article 243 of the Constitution of India.
6. In order to appreciate the controversy which has been raised, it may be relevant to mention the history of this enactment. The M
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
