Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Archna Phulare, was the Upa-Sarpanch of Shivgaon-Pathari Gram Panchayat. A no-confidence motion was passed against her by 7 votes to 2 out of nine total elected members. The petitioner challenged the motion on the ground that one of the members who voted against her, Ashok Borase, was disqualified for not submitting a caste validity certificate within one year, and his application had been rejected by the Scrutiny Committee. The petitioner argued that the 3/4th majority required for removal should be calculated based on the total nine members, and excluding the disqualified member, the vote was 6:2, which is less than 3/4th of nine (i.e., 6.75). The respondents contended that the Government Ordinance dated 10.07.2023 extended the time for submitting caste validity certificates by one year, and thus the member was not disqualified. The court examined the Ordinance and found that Section 3(2)(b) of the Ordinance provides that the extension does not apply to members whose application has been rejected. Since the member's application was rejected, he stood disqualified and could not vote. The court held that the 3/4th majority must be calculated on the basis of the total members of the panchayat, not merely those present. Excluding the disqualified member, the effective strength was eight, and 3/4th of eight is six. The motion was passed by 6:2, which meets the requirement. The court dismissed the petition, upholding the no-confidence motion.
Headnote
A) Panchayat Law - No-Confidence Motion - Upa-Sarpanch - 3/4th Majority - Calculation - The question was whether the 3/4th majority required for removal of Upa-sarpanch should be computed on the basis of total members of the panchayat or only those present and voting. The court held that the 3/4th majority must be calculated considering the total members of the panchayat, not merely those present. (Paras 3, 6) B) Panchayat Law - Disqualification - Caste Validity Certificate - Effect on Voting - A member whose caste validity certificate application was rejected by the Scrutiny Committee stands disqualified and cannot vote in a no-confidence motion. The court held that such a member ceases to hold office and his vote cannot be counted. (Paras 4, 5, 6) C) Panchayat Law - Government Ordinance - Extension of Time - Section 3(2)(b) - The extension of one year under the Government Ordinance dated 10.07.2023 does not apply to members whose application for caste validity certificate has been rejected by the Scrutiny Committee. (Para 5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether 3/4th majority for a no-confidence motion against the Upa-sarpanch should be calculated considering the total members of the panchayat.
Final Decision
The court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the no-confidence motion was validly passed. The 3/4th majority must be calculated on the basis of total members of the panchayat. Excluding the disqualified member, the effective strength was eight, and 3/4th of eight is six. The motion was passed by 6:2, which meets the requirement.
Law Points
- No-confidence motion
- Upa-sarpanch
- 3/4th majority
- total members
- disqualification
- caste validity certificate
- Government Ordinance
- Section 3(2)(b)
- Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act
