Bombay High Court Quashes Collector's Order in Village Panchayat Ward Delimitation Dispute — Circular Violation Found. Sara City Area Transfer to Ward No.1 Set Aside for Non-Compliance with State Election Commission Circular Dated 29.11.2019.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, Mr. Hanumant Ananta Kad and another, filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 27.10.2020 passed by the Collector, Pune (respondent no.3). By that order, the Collector allowed an objection raised by respondent no.6 regarding the inclusion of an area named 'Sara City' in ward no.1 of the Kharabwadi Village Panchayat, Taluka Khed, District Pune. Previously, Sara City was included in ward nos.5 and 6. The petitioners contended that the impugned order was in contravention of the circular dated 29.11.2019 issued by the State Election Commission, specifically pointing out Clause Nos. 5(B)(i), (ii), (v) and (vi) of the said circular. They also argued that Sara City was in existence before 2015, as evidenced by tax receipts from the Gram Panchayat for the years 2011-2012, 2012-2013, and 2013-2014. The petitioners relied on Section 10(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1959 and Rule 3 of the Bombay Village Panchayats (Number of Members, Divisions into Wards and Reservation of Seats) Rules, 1966 to argue that the order was contrary to these provisions. The learned AGP for the respondent-State submitted that Sara City was included in ward no.1 to maintain geographical continuity and that population was also considered. He relied on the report of the Tehsildar and the local inspection by the Talathi. The counsel for respondent no.6 argued that Sara City was not in existence until the earlier election of 2015 and that including its population in ward nos.5 and 6 would make those wards excessively populated, justifying the transfer. The court examined the relevant provisions: Section 10(1)(b) of the Act requires that the panchayat area be divided into wards such that the ratio between population and seats is, as far as practicable, the same throughout. Rule 3(1) of the Rules provides for division into wards and fixing the number of members. The court noted that the impugned order was passed without considering the circular dated 29.11.2019 issued by the State Election Commission, which was binding. The court found that the Collector's order was in contravention of the circular and the provisions of the Act and Rules. Consequently, the court quashed and set aside the impugned order and directed the Collector to decide the objection afresh in accordance with the circular and the provisions of the Act and Rules, after giving an opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties.

Headnote

A) Village Panchayat - Ward Delimitation - Compliance with State Election Commission Circular - Section 10(1)(b) Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1959, Rule 3 Bombay Village Panchayats (Number of Members, Divisions into Wards and Reservation of Seats) Rules, 1966 - The Collector's order transferring Sara City area to ward no.1 was set aside as it violated the circular dated 29.11.2019 issued by the State Election Commission, which required that objections be decided in accordance with the circular's clauses. The court held that the impugned order was contrary to the circular and the provisions of the Act and Rules (Paras 1-8).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 27.10.2020 passed by the Collector, Pune, transferring the area 'Sara City' from ward nos.5 and 6 to ward no.1 of Kharabwadi Village Panchayat, is in contravention of the circular dated 29.11.2019 issued by the State Election Commission and the provisions of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1959 and the Rules thereunder.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The impugned order dated 27.10.2020 passed by the respondent no.3-Collector, Pune is quashed and set aside. The Collector is directed to decide the objection afresh in accordance with the circular dated 29.11.2019 issued by the State Election Commission and the provisions of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1959 and the Rules, after giving an opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties.

Law Points

  • Ward delimitation must comply with State Election Commission circular
  • Section 10(1)(b) Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act
  • 1959
  • Rule 3 Bombay Village Panchayats (Number of Members
  • Divisions into Wards and Reservation of Seats) Rules
  • 1966
  • geographical continuity and population ratio considerations
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2020 LawText (BOM) (12) 38

WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 95325 OF 2020

2020-12-07

R. D. Dhanuka, Madhav J. Jamdar

Mrs. Neeta Karnik i/by Suraj Chakor for the Petitioners, Mr. Y. D. Patil, AGP for the Respondent-State, Mr. Vaibhav V. Ugale for the Respondent No.6

Mr. Hanumant Ananta Kad and Anr.

State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging the order of the Collector, Pune, regarding delimitation of wards of Kharabwadi Village Panchayat.

Remedy Sought

Quashing of the impugned order dated 27.10.2020 passed by the Collector, Pune, and a direction to decide the objection afresh in accordance with the circular dated 29.11.2019 issued by the State Election Commission.

Filing Reason

The petitioners contended that the impugned order transferring the area 'Sara City' from ward nos.5 and 6 to ward no.1 was in contravention of the circular dated 29.11.2019 issued by the State Election Commission and the provisions of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1959 and the Rules thereunder.

Previous Decisions

The Collector, Pune, passed the impugned order dated 27.10.2020 allowing the objection of respondent no.6 for including Sara City in ward no.1.

Issues

Whether the impugned order dated 27.10.2020 passed by the Collector, Pune, is in contravention of the circular dated 29.11.2019 issued by the State Election Commission? Whether the impugned order is contrary to Section 10(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1959 and Rule 3 of the Bombay Village Panchayats (Number of Members, Divisions into Wards and Reservation of Seats) Rules, 1966?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners: The impugned order violates the circular dated 29.11.2019 of the State Election Commission, specifically Clause Nos. 5(B)(i), (ii), (v) and (vi). Sara City existed before 2015 as per tax receipts. The order is contrary to Section 10(1)(b) of the Act and Rule 3 of the Rules. Respondent-State: Sara City was included in ward no.1 to maintain geographical continuity and considering population. Relied on Tehsildar's report and Talathi's local inspection report. Respondent No.6: Sara City was not in existence until the 2015 election. Including its population in ward nos.5 and 6 would make them excessively populated, justifying the transfer. Relied on reports of Talathi, Circle Officer, and Sub-Divisional Officer.

Ratio Decidendi

The Collector's order transferring Sara City to ward no.1 was in contravention of the circular dated 29.11.2019 issued by the State Election Commission, which was binding. The order did not comply with the requirements of the circular and the provisions of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1959 and the Rules. Therefore, the order was quashed and the matter remanded for fresh consideration.

Judgment Excerpts

The petitioners by the present writ petition have challenged the order dated 27.10.2020 passed by the respondent no.3-Collector, Pune. Mrs. Karnik, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order passed is in contravention of the circular dated 29.11.2019 issued by the State Election Commission. Section 10(1)(b) of the said Act provides that each village shall be divided into such number of wards... Rule 3(1) of the Rules provides that subject to the provisions of sub-Section 1 of Section 10, a village shall be divided into wards...

Procedural History

The petitioners filed a writ petition in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay challenging the order dated 27.10.2020 passed by the Collector, Pune. The court heard the petitioners, the learned AGP for the respondent-State, and the counsel for respondent no.6. After considering the submissions and the relevant provisions, the court quashed the impugned order and remanded the matter for fresh decision.

Acts & Sections

  • Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1959: Section 10(1)(b)
  • Bombay Village Panchayats (Number of Members, Divisions into Wards and Reservation of Seats) Rules, 1966: Rule 3
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Suit for Declaration of Ownership and Injunction in Flat Dispute — Plaintiff Fails to Establish Title as Flat Was Allotted to Original Owner Under Development Agreement.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction of Appellants for Murder and Hurt in Land Dispute — Common Intention Established. Appellants convicted under Sections 302 and 324 read with Section 34 IPC for fatal assault on deceased with sticks and axes.