"Bordering On Break Down Of Rule Of Law": Supreme Court On Madhya Pradesh Not Holding Elections In Over 23,000 Local Bodies

Noting that "the reality in the state of Madhya Pradesh as of now, is that, more than 23, 263 local bodies are functioning without the elected representatives for last over two years and more", the Supreme Court on Tuesday observed, "This is bordering on break down of rule of law and more so, palpable infraction of the constitutional mandate qua the existence and functioning of such local self-government, which cannot be countenanced"The bench headed by Justice A. M. Khanwilkar was passing an interim order on the writ petition assailing the validity of Section 10(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Municipal Act, 1956, Sections 12, 23 and 30 of the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 and Section 29 of the Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961 as being arbitrary and usurping the powers and independence of the State Election Commission. By stated amendments, the State Government has been authorised to issue notification from time to time determining the number and extent of wards to be constituted in the concerned local bodies."Reverting to the issue of non-conduct of elections in respect of large number of local bodies in the State of Madhya Pradesh, even that is no different. As a matter of fact, the number in this State is quite staggering. The chart handed over to the Court by the learned counsel for the Madhya Pradesh State Election Commission, indicates that there are about 321 urban local bodies, where elections have not been held from 2019-2020. Further, the local bodies at the grassroot level (rural local bodies) where elections have not been held in the same manner are around 23,073, as of now", noted the bench(Suresh Mahajan versus State of Madhya Pradesh).The bench recorded that the elections have not been held assumedly for the reason that the State has still not been able to complete the triple test formalities as predicated in the decision of this Court in Vikas Kishanrao Gawali Vs. State of Maharashtra- "As a result of which, reservation for Other Backward Classes (OBC) category cannot be provisioned by the State Election Commission. This has happened despite the peremptory directions given by this Court vide successive orders, including dated 03.03.2022. This Court had made it amply clear that conduct of elections to install the newly elected body in the concerned local self-government cannot brook delay, owing to the Constitutional mandate exposited in Article 243-E and 243-U including the provisions in the concerned State Legislation in that regard".Constitutional Mandate Under Article 243-E and 243-U inviolableThe bench stated that a somewhat hiatus situation occurs and is permitted only when the dissolution of a local body is necessitated before the expiry of the term of that local body. Else, the term of the local self-government has been specified as 5 (five) years from its first meeting, "and no longer", in Article 243-E as well as in 243-U; that thus, all concerned are obliged to ensure that the newly elected body is installed in every local body before the expiry of 5 (five) years term of the outgoing elected body. Even in case of dissolution before the expiry of five years period, where an Administrator is required to be appointed by the State, that regime cannot be continued beyond 6 (six) months by virtue of relevant provisions in the respective State Legislation(s)."This constitutional mandate is inviolable. Neither the State Election Commission nor the State Government or for that matter the State Legislature, including this Court in exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India can countenance dispensation to the contrary. Despite such constitutional mandate, the reality in the State of Madhya Pradesh as of now, is that, more than 23,263 local bodies are functioning without the elected representatives for last over two years and more. This is bordering on break down of rule of law and more so, palpable infraction of the constitutional mandate qua the existence and functioning of such local self- government, which cannot be countenanced", remarked the bench.It continued to note that the fact that the State legislature has effected amendments in the concerned enactment(s) authorising the State Government to determine the number and extent of wards to be constituted in the local bodies within the State also cannot be a tangible or legitimate ground to not notify the election programme within the time-frame specified by the Constitution and the law made by the Legislature in that regard."In any case, the ongoing activity of delimitation or formation of ward cannot be a legitimate ground to be set forth by any authority much less the State Election Commission - to not discharge its constitutional obligation in notifying the election programme at the opportune time and to ensure that the elected body is installed before the expiry of 5 (five) years term of the outgoing elected body. If there is need to undertake delimitation - which indeed is a...

"Bordering On Break Down Of Rule Of Law": Supreme Court On Madhya Pradesh Not Holding Elections In Over 23,000 Local Bodies

Mehal Jain

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

"Bordering On Break Down Of Rule Of Law": Supreme Court On Madhya Pradesh Not Holding Elections In Over 23,000 Local Bodies

Mehal Jain

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers