Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act - No Statutory Appeal Lies Against Section 14B(1) Order Refusing To Disqualify Sarpanch Or Panchayat Member Panchayat: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court held that no statutory appeal lies against an order passed under Section 14B(1) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959, refusing to disqualify the Sarpanch or Member of Panchayat. The Apex Court clarified that Section 14B(2) of the Act does not provide for an appeal mechanism for the orders passed under Section 14B(1). A bench comprising Justices A.M. Khanwilkar and C.T. Ravikumar allowed an appeal filed assailing the order of the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, wherein the order of disqualification passed by the Divisional Commissioner under Section 14B(2) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1959 ("Act") setting aside the orders of the Collector under Section 14B(1) was affirmed. The Apex Court set aside the order of the Divisional Commissioner as non-est in law, and restored the orders passed by the Collector rejecting the applications seeking disqualification of the appellants. Factual Background The appellants contested Panchayat elections in September, 2018. One of the appellants was elected as Sarpanch of Village Panchayat, Kusumba, Taluka and District Dhule in Maharashtra, while the other was elected as a member of the same Village Panchayat. One Sangram Govindrav Patil filed two dispute applications with the Collector to disqualify the appellants under Section 14B(1) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1959 for not submitting election expenses within stipulated time, which were eventually rejected. The appeals preferred by Patil were allowed by the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik Region and the appellants were disqualified. Subsequently, they filed writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. The High Court affirmed the order of disqualification passed by the Divisional Commissioner. Contentions raised by the parties Advocate, Mr. Sudhanshu S. Choudhari, appearing on behalf of the appellants argued that the Act does not provide for an appeal against the order passed by the Collector under Section 14B(1). It was further averred that the remedy provided by the Divisional Commissioner under Section 14B(2) is limited to removing disqualification or reducing the period of disqualification. It was emphasised that no appeal lies from rejection of application seeking disqualification of Sarpanch/Member under the Act. Advocate, Mr. Nishant R. Katneshwarkar, appearing on behalf of Sangram Govindrav Patil, argued to the contrary. Analysis of the Supreme Court Sections 14B(1) and 14B(2) operate in two different silosThe Court observed that Section 14B(1) of the Act as inserted by an amendment in 2010 enabled the State Election Commission to declare a member of Panchayat as disqualified for being a member or contesting election, for a period of five years from the date of order, if they fail to lodge account of election expenses within stipulated time period and in the prescribed manner. It further noted that Section 14B(2) inserted by the same amendment, enabled the State Election Commission to remove the disqualification imposed by Section 14B(1) or reduce the period. The State Election Commission issued an order under Article 243-K of the Constitution and Section 10A(2) of the Act to delegate the power under Section 14B(1) to the Collector of District and the power under Section 14B(2) to the concerned Divisional Commissioner. The Apex Court asserted that there was no provision in the Act to indicate that there exists an appeal against the order of the Collector refusing to disqualify the Sarpanch/member under Section 14B(1). Under Section 14B(2) the Divisional Officer was authorised to only remove or reduce the period of disqualification and nothing more. The Court observed that Section 14B(2) would only come into play in cases where the Collector disqualifies a member and not where it rejects application for disqualification. "The power of the State Election Commission, bestowed under subSection (1) or (2) of Section 14B, though concerns subject of disqualification of a person, it operates in two different silos. In that, the power under Section 14B(2) gets triggered only after an order of disqualification is passed under Section 14B(1). The former is not activated at all in a case where the application or the proceedings to declare the Sarpanch/Member as disqualified, is rejected or dropped." Appeal cannot lie before the same authority It was emphasised by the Court that the statute, which granted power under both Section 14B(1) and Section 14B(2) to the State Election Commissioner could not have intended Section 14B(2) to act as an appeal mechanism for Section 14B(1), as appeal can never lie before the same authority. "Taking any other view would inevitably result in a situation where the power exercised by the State Election Commission under Section 14B(1) could be appealed against before itself (its delegatee). That cannot be countenanced. For,...

Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act - No Statutory Appeal Lies Against Section 14B(1) Order Refusing To Disqualify Sarpanch Or Panchayat Member Panchayat: Supreme Court

Sohini Chowdhury

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sohini Chowdhury

Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act - No Statutory Appeal Lies Against Section 14B(1) Order Refusing To Disqualify Sarpanch Or Panchayat Member Panchayat: Supreme Court

Sohini Chowdhury

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sohini Chowdhury

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers