Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Kanhoba Vishnu Raul, Sarpanch of Village Panchayat of Alarna, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 21.10.2005 passed by the State Election Commissioner, Panaji, in Petition No.3/05. The Commissioner had disqualified respondent No.3, Devanand Laxman Arondekar, a Panch of the same Panchayat, from continuing as a member on the ground that he had accepted full-time employment as a trainee Lower Division Clerk in the Directorate of Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Services, Government of Goa, pursuant to an order dated 25.6.2004. The petitioner argued that respondent No.3 had incurred disqualification under Section 10(c) of the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, which disqualifies a person from being a member if he holds any office of profit under the Government. The petitioner contended that the Commissioner's order was contrary to Section 11 of the Act and the Supreme Court decision in Brundaban Nayak v. Election Commission of India. The court examined the facts: respondent No.3 was elected as Panch, later applied for and obtained full-time employment as a trainee clerk, drawing salary and allowances. The court held that the trainee was a full-time employee of the Government, not an honorary or part-time worker, and thus held an office of profit under the Government, attracting disqualification under Section 10(c). The court further held that the State Election Commissioner had jurisdiction under Section 11 to decide such disqualification, and the order was not contrary to the cited precedent. The petition was dismissed, upholding the disqualification.
Headnote
A) Panchayat Law - Disqualification of Member - Office of Profit - Section 10(c) Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 - Acceptance of full-time employment as a trainee Lower Division Clerk in the State Government constitutes holding an office of profit under the Government, thereby disqualifying the member from continuing as Panch. The court held that the trainee was a full-time employee drawing salary and allowances, and the employment was not honorary or part-time. (Paras 2-5) B) Panchayat Law - Jurisdiction of State Election Commissioner - Disqualification - Section 11 Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 - The State Election Commissioner has the authority to decide questions of disqualification of a Panch under Section 10(c) of the Act. The court held that the Commissioner's order dated 21.10.2005 was valid and not contrary to Section 11 or the decision in Brundaban Nayak v. Election Commission of India. (Paras 2, 6-7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a Panch who accepts full-time employment as a trainee Lower Division Clerk in the State Government incurs disqualification under Section 10(c) of the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, and whether the State Election Commissioner has jurisdiction to decide such disqualification under Section 11 of the said Act.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the order of the State Election Commissioner dated 21.10.2005 disqualifying respondent No.3 from continuing as a Panch.
Law Points
- Disqualification for membership of Panchayat
- Office of profit
- Full-time government employment
- Section 10(c) Goa Panchayat Raj Act
- 1994
- Section 11 Goa Panchayat Raj Act
- Trainee as employee
