Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Kalpana Bapurao Thakare, was elected as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Nandgaon Chincholi. Elections for the post of UpaSarpanch were scheduled for 28.12.2017. On the previous day, the petitioner approached the Collector seeking permission to cast her vote in the UpaSarpanch election, relying on a Division Bench judgment in Anuja Kalyan Gore v. State of Maharashtra (Writ Petition No.209 of 2018) which held that a Sarpanch is entitled to vote in such elections. The Collector rejected the application, stating that the judgment applied only to that specific Gram Panchayat. Consequently, the election was held on 28.12.2017, and respondent no.5 was elected as UpaSarpanch with four votes against three for the opponent. The petitioner filed the present writ petition on 25.01.2018 challenging the Collector's order. The Court considered the issue of whether a Sarpanch is entitled to vote in the election of UpaSarpanch. The Court noted that the Sarpanch is a member of the Gram Panchayat and, under the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959, is entitled to vote in the election of UpaSarpanch. The Court held that the Collector's refusal was unjustified and set aside the order dated 27.12.2017. However, since the election had already been held, the Court did not disturb the election result but directed that in future, the Sarpanch shall be permitted to vote in such elections.
Headnote
A) Panchayat Law - Election of UpaSarpanch - Voting Rights of Sarpanch - Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959, Sections 30, 31 - The petitioner, elected Sarpanch, was refused permission by the Collector to vote in the UpaSarpanch election. The Court held that the Sarpanch is a member of the Gram Panchayat and is entitled to vote in the election of UpaSarpanch. The Collector's order was set aside. (Paras 2-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Sarpanch of a Gram Panchayat is entitled to cast her vote in the election of the UpaSarpanch?
Final Decision
The Court set aside the order dated 27.12.2017 passed by the Collector. However, since the election of UpaSarpanch had already been held, the Court did not disturb the election result. The Court directed that in future, the Sarpanch shall be permitted to vote in the election of UpaSarpanch.
Law Points
- Sarpanch is a member of Gram Panchayat
- Sarpanch entitled to vote in UpaSarpanch election
- Collector cannot refuse permission to vote
- Writ petition maintainable despite election being held
Case Details
2019 LawText (BOM) (07) 191
Writ Petition No. 560/2018
Shri A.S. Deshpande for petitioner; Shri A.V. Palshikar for respondent nos.1 and 3; Shri J.B. Kasat for respondent no.2; Shri J.B. Gandhi for respondent no.5
Collector, Washim; State Election Commission, Maharashtra State; Tahsildar Mangrulpir; Gut Gram Panchayat Nanggaon/Chincholi; Vijay S/o Pundlikrao Thakare
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the order of the Collector refusing to permit the petitioner Sarpanch to cast her vote in the election of UpaSarpanch.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought to set aside the Collector's order and to be allowed to vote in the UpaSarpanch election.
Filing Reason
The Collector refused to permit the petitioner to vote in the UpaSarpanch election despite a Division Bench judgment holding that a Sarpanch is entitled to vote.
Previous Decisions
The Collector rejected the petitioner's application on 27.12.2017. The election was held on 28.12.2017, and respondent no.5 was elected as UpaSarpanch.
Issues
Whether the Sarpanch is entitled to vote in the election of UpaSarpanch?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the Collector was not justified in refusing permission to vote, as the issue stands covered by the Division Bench judgment in Anuja Kalyan Gore v. State of Maharashtra.
Ratio Decidendi
The Sarpanch is a member of the Gram Panchayat and is entitled to vote in the election of UpaSarpanch under the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959. The Collector's refusal to permit the Sarpanch to vote was unjustified.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioner who had been elected as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Nandgaon Chincholi has challenged the order dated 27.12.2017 passed by the Collector refusing to permit the petitioner to cast her vote in the election of UpaSarpanch that was to be held on the next day.
The Collector rejected the said application on the ground that the adjudication therein pertained to the concerned Gram Panchayat and it could not be applied to the Gram Panchayat where the petitioner was elected as Sarpanch.
Procedural History
The petitioner was elected Sarpanch. On 27.12.2017, she applied to the Collector for permission to vote in the UpaSarpanch election scheduled for 28.12.2017. The Collector rejected the application. The election was held on 28.12.2017, and respondent no.5 was elected. The petitioner filed the writ petition on 25.01.2018. The Court heard the matter and delivered judgment on 01.07.2019.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959: 30, 31
