Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

13. The concept of Panchayat was thought by the framers of the Constitution at the time of its framing as is evident from Part IV. Article 40 of the Constitution, which enshrines one of the directive principles of State policy and lays down organization of village Panchayats and casts duty on the State to take steps to organize village Panchayats and endow them with such powers and authority, as may be necessary to enable then to function as units of Self-Government.

14. Though the Panchayat Raj institutions have been in existence, it was found that those institutions had not been able to acquire the status and dignity of viable and responsive people bodies, due to a number of reasons, including absence of regular election, prolonged supersession, insufficient representation of weaker section like Scheduled Casts," Scheduled Tribes and Women, inadequate devolution of powers and lack of financial resources. Keeping in view such statement of objects and reasons, a new Part IX relating to Panchayats was inserted in the Constitution by The Constitution (Seventy-third Amendment) Act, 1982, comprised of Article 243 to Article 243-O. Those provisions do not apply automatically to the Scheduled areas and tribal areas. Article 243-M prohibits application of its provision in scheduled areas and tribal areas. However. Article 243-M(4)(b) makes the provision, enabling the Parliament, by law, to extend the provision of Part IX, subject to such exceptions and modifications, as may be specified in such law. For the first time, constitutional provision was made under Article 243-D, reserving the seats of Panchayats in favour of weaker sections, such as, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Women. Consequent upon the changes incorporated in Constitution, the then combined State of Bihar enacted 'Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 1993', superseding Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 1947. It was made applicable only in non-scheduled areas. Seats and offices of Chairpersons, such as, Mukhiya Up-Mukhiya, Pramukh Up-Pramukh and Adhyuaksh-Upadhyaksh, cent-percent of which were reserved, were held to be unconstitutional on the ground of excessive reservation and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, by a Division Bench of Patna High Court in the case of Krishna Kumar Mishra v. State of Bihar, reported in 1996(1) PLJR 581.