Case Note & Summary
The case involves a dispute regarding the election of the Up-Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Sukli, District Akola. The petitioners, who are members of the Gram Panchayat, challenged the election of respondent no.6 as Up-Sarpanch on the ground that he was disqualified under Section 14(1)(j-3) of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961 for failure to pay a tax due to the panchayat. The Collector initially upheld the petitioners' objection and declared respondent no.6 disqualified. However, on appeal, the Divisional Commissioner set aside the Collector's order and upheld the election. The petitioners then filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court. The court examined the relevant provision and found that the Gram Panchayat had not imposed any tax, and therefore no tax was due from respondent no.6. The court held that the disqualification under Section 14(1)(j-3) applies only when a tax is actually due and payable. Since no tax was due, there was no failure to pay, and respondent no.6 was not disqualified. The court further held that the election of respondent no.6 as Up-Sarpanch was valid as it was unopposed. The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the order of the Divisional Commissioner.
Headnote
A) Local Self-Government - Disqualification of Members - Section 14(1)(j-3) Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961 - Disqualification for failure to pay tax - The provision disqualifies a member who has failed to pay any tax due to the panchayat for one year. The court held that the disqualification applies only when a tax is actually due and payable. In this case, the Gram Panchayat had not imposed any tax, and therefore no tax was due. The failure to pay a non-existent tax cannot attract disqualification. The court emphasized that disqualification provisions must be strictly construed. (Paras 5-7) B) Local Self-Government - Election of Up-Sarpanch - Validity of Unopposed Election - The election of respondent no.6 as Up-Sarpanch was unopposed. The petitioners challenged it on the ground that respondent no.6 was disqualified. The court held that since no disqualification was established, the election was valid. The appeal before the Divisional Commissioner was correctly allowed. (Paras 2-8) C) Local Self-Government - Appeal under Section 16 of the Act - Scope of Appellate Authority - The Divisional Commissioner, as appellate authority under Section 16 of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961, has the power to set aside an order of the Collector if it is erroneous. The court upheld the Commissioner's order setting aside the Collector's decision that had declared respondent no.6 disqualified. (Paras 2, 8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a member of a Gram Panchayat is disqualified under Section 14(1)(j-3) of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961 for failure to pay a tax that was not actually due or payable at the relevant time.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. The order of the Divisional Commissioner dated 23.05.2018 is upheld. The election of respondent no.6 as Up-Sarpanch is valid.
Law Points
- Interpretation of disqualification under Section 14(1)(j-3) of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act
- 1961
- requirement of actual tax due for disqualification
- strict construction of disqualification provisions
- election dispute resolution under Section 16 of the Act
