Supreme Court - Daily Orders
The Chief Secretary, Govt. Of ... vs J. Anandalakshmi . on 8 May, 2018
Bench: Rohinton Fali Nariman, Abhay Manohar Sapre
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 4994-4995 OF 2018
(Arising out of SLP(C) Nos.24321-24322 of 2015)
THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF PUDUCHERRY ... Appellant(s)
Versus
J.ANANDALAKSHMI & ORS. ... Respondent(s)
O R D E R
Leave granted.
The present appeals have been filed by the Government of Puducherry against the judgments dated 22.04.2015 and 10.07.2015 by which the appellant was directed by June 15 2015 as an outer limit to complete delimitation and hold elections immediately thereafter. The relevant constitutional provisions in this behalf are contained in Part IX, insofar as Panchayat Elections are concerned. We are concerned directly with the reservation of seats and the fact that the duration of an elected body shall be five years and not more. As a Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by ASHA SUNDRIYAL result, the constitutional position is very clear that Date: 2018.05.11 17:11:38 IST Reason: the elections should be conducted well in advance of the date of dissolution of the body.
2Articles 243D and E are set out herein below:
“243D. Reservation of seats - (1) Seats shall be reserved for-
(a) the Scheduled Castes; and
(b) the Scheduled Tribes, in every Panchayat and the number of seats so reserved shall bear, as nearly as may be, the same proportion to the total number of seats to be filled by direct election in that Panchayat as the population of the Scheduled Castes in that Panchayat area or of the Scheduled Tribes in that Panchayat area bears to the total population of that area and such seats may be allotted by rotation to different constituencies in a Panchayat (2) Not less than one third of the total number of seats reserved under clause (1) shall be reserved for women belonging to the Scheduled Castes or, as the case may be, the Scheduled Tribes (3) Not less than one third (including the number of seats reserved for women belonging to the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes) of the total number of seats to be filled by direct election in every Panchayat shall be reserved for women and such seats may be allotted by rotation to different constituencies in a Panchayat (4) The offices of the Chairpersons in the Panchayats at the village or any other level shall be reserved for the Scheduled Castes the Scheduled Tribes and women in such manner as the Legislature of a State may, by law, provide:
Provided that the number of offices of Chairpersons reserved for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes in the Panchayats at each level in any State 3 shall bear, as nearly as may be, the same proportion to the total number of such offices in the Panchayats at each level as the population of the Scheduled Castes in the State or of the Scheduled Tribes in the State bears to the total population of the State:
Provided further that not less than one third of the total number of offices of Chairpersons in the Panchayats at each level shall be reserved for women:
Provided also that the number of offices reserved under this clause shall be allotted by rotation to different Panchayats at each level (5) The reservation of seats under clauses (1) and (2) and the reservation of offices of Chairpersons (other than the reservation for women) under clause (4) shall cease to have effect on the expiration of the period specified in Article 334 (6) Nothing in this Part shall prevent the Legislature of a State from making any provision for reservation of seats in any Panchayat or offices of Chairpersons in the Panchayats at any level in favour of backward class of citizens.
243E. Duration of Panchayats, etc. - (1) Every Panchayat, unless sooner dissolved under any law for the time being in force, shall continue for five years from the date appointed for its first meeting and no longer (2) No amendment of any law for the time being in force shall have the effect of causing dissolution of a Panchayat at any level, which is functioning immediately before such amendment, till the expiration of its duration specified in clause (1) (3) An election to constitute a Panchayat shall be 4 completed -
(a) before the expiry of its duration specified in clause (1);
(b) before the expiration of a period of six months from the date of its dissolution:
Provided that where the remainder of the period for which the dissolved Panchayat would have continued is less than six months, it shall not be necessary to hold any election under this clause for constituting the Panchayat for such period. (4) A Panchayat constituted upon the dissolution of a Panchayat before the expiration of its duration shall continue only for the remainder of the period for which the dissolved Panchayat would have continued under clause (1) had it not been so dissolved.” This Court in Kishansing Tomar Vs. Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad & Ors. (2006) 8 SCC 352 dealt with the aforesaid provisions and held as follows:
“19. From the opinion expressed by this Court, it is clear that the State Election Commission shall not put forward any excuse based on unreasonable grounds that the election could not be completed in time. The Election Commission shall try to complete the election before the expiration of the duration of five years' period as stipulated in clause (5). Any revision of electoral rolls shall be carried out in time and if it cannot be carried out within a reasonable time, the election has to be conducted on the basis of the then existing electoral rolls. In other words, the Election Commission shall complete the election before the expiration of the duration of five years' period as stipulated in clause (5) and not yield to situations that may be created by vested interests to postpone elections from being held within the stipulated time.
20. The majority opinion in Lakshmi Charan Sen Vs. A.K.M.Hassan Uzzaman held that the fact that certain claims and objections are not finally disposed of while preparing the electoral rolls or even assuming that they are not filed in accordance with law cannot arrest the process of election to the legislature. The election has to be held on the basis of the electoral rolls which are in force on the last date for making nomination. It is true that the Election Commission shall take steps to prepare the electoral rolls by following due process of law, but that too, should be done timely and in no circumstances, it shall be delayed so as to cause gross violation of the mandatory provisions contained in Article 243-U of the Constitution.
21. It is true that there may be certain man-made calamities such as rioting or breakdown of law and order, or natural calamities which could distract the authorities from holding elections to the municipality, but they are exception circumstances and under no (sic other) circumstance would the Election Commission be justified in delaying the process of election after consulting the State Government and other authorities. But that should be an exception circumstance and shall not be a regular feature to extend the duration of the municipality. Going by the provisions contained in Article 243-U, it is clear that the period of five years fixed thereunder to constitute the municipality is mandatory in nature and has to be followed in all respects. It is only when the municipality is dissolved for any other reason and the remainder of the period for which the dissolved municipality would have continued is less than six months, it shall not be necessary to hold any elections for constituting the municipality for such period.” The present case discloses a sorry state of affairs.
Despite the fact that the electoral body had to demit office in the year 2011, no election has yet been held. We may only state that the Puducherry Village and Commune Panchayat Act, 1973 has provisions contained in Section 11(1) to (8) thereof which are reflective of the constitutional provisions qua reservation in Article 243D (1) and (6). Unfortunately, despite this being the constitutional provision, by virtue of interim and other orders passed by the High Court, the process of delimitation has dragged on and has not culminated in any fruitful result. Ultimately, the appellant by a letter dated 06.07.2015 written to the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, has stated that the process remains stalled because no backward class information has yet been received, despite the fact that all other data including census information had been received and delimitation could have been carried out. Both the constitutional position as well as the State Act make it clear that reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes is based on population, whereas if provision has to be made for backward classes, it is left to the States to do so, if they so desire. This being so, we see no further impediment in the State Election Commission completing delimitation as soon as possible.
We, therefore, direct respondent No. 4 before us to complete the delimitation exercise insofar as Panchayat and Municipal elections are concerned within a period of four weeks from today. The moment this is complete, the elections to the municipalities and panchayats will be notified immediately and held in accordance with the constitutional and statutory provisions concerned. Needless to add, no further delay can be brooked, and it will be open for any party to come back to this Court in case the needful is not done within the strict time limit fixed by us. We make it clear that on no account will the election process be stalled after delimitation is complete.
The appeals are disposed of accordingly. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
......................J. (ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN) …......................J. (L.NAGESWARA RAO) New Delhi, Dated: 8th May, 2018.
ITEM NO.18 COURT NO.11 SECTION XII
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).
24321-24322/2015
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 22-04-2015 in WP No. 30477/2012 10-07-2015 in WP No. 30477/2012 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Madras) THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF PUDUCHERRY & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS J. ANANDALAKSHMI . & ORS. Respondent(s) (Application for Impleadment Date : 08-05-2018 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE For Petitioner(s) Mr. R.Venkataramni, Sr. Adv.
Mr. V.G.Pragasam, Adv.
Mr. Prabu Ramasubramanian, Adv. Mr. S.Manuraj, Adv.
Mr. Yashraj Singh Bundela, Adv. Mr. Praveen Vignesh, Adv.
Mr. Maninder Singh, ASG, Mr. R.Balasubramaanian, Adv. Mr. Nalin Kohli, Adv.
Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Alka Aggarwal, Adv.
Mr. Raj Bahadur, Adv.
Mr. Prabhas Bajaj, Adv.
Ms. Aarti Sharma, Adv.
Mr. R. Sathish, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Neeraj Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. V.Balaji, Adv.
Mr. Nsm Asai Thambi, Adv.
Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma, AOR Mr. C.Kanan, Adv.
Mr. B.Adinarayana Rao, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., AOR Ms. Priya Aristotle, adv.
Mr. Maninder Singh, ASG, Mr. R.Balasubramaanian, Adv. Mr. Nalin Kohli, Adv.
Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Alka Aggarwal, Adv.
Mr. Raj Bahadur, Adv.
Mr. Prabhas Bajaj, Adv.
Ms. Aarti Sharma, Adv.
Mr. R. Sathish, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.
The appeals are disposed of in terms of signed order. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
(SHASHI SAREEN) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) AR CUM PS BRANCH OFFICER
(Signed order is placed on the file)