Kulwant Kaur v. State of punjab & Ors.

Shri Arun Jain, Senior Advocate, assisted by Shri Ashok Jindal, Advocate, for the petitioner, has stated that ordinarily the petitioner would have continued as a Panch till the year 2011. She was elected for a period of five years and by passing a resolution, which has been accepted by the State, she has been deprived of three years of her term, for which she was elected. There is no doubt that term of the petitioner as a Panch has been curtailed. She was to continue as a Panch of the Gram Sabha till the year 2001. But this was done in pursuance of the voluntary resolution Civil Writ Petition No.19173 of 2008 -: 3 :- passed by the Gram Sabha as they intended that the term could conform to the general elections to be held in the State of Punjab for all the Gram Sabhas. For this transition, Gram Sabha voluntarily opted to dissolve itself. The matter of fact is that in pursuance of the resolution, and dissolution of the Gram Panchayat, fresh elections to the Gram Sabha have been held on 14.6.2008. Once Gram Sabha has been constituted, elections have been held, this Court cannot revive the Gram Sabha of which the petitioner was a Panch. A reference can be made to S.R. Bommai v. Union of India, AIR 1994 SC 1918 wherein even though dissolution of the Assembly was held to be bad, it was observed that because of fresh constitution of the Assembly, previously dissolved legislature cannot be revived. A similar view was formed by a Full Bench of this Court in Captain Kanwaljit Singh v. Union of India, AIR 1991 P&H 54. It was aptly put by the Full Bench regarding the revival of the dissolved Assembly as under:- “Grant of such a declaration would virtually amount to unscramble a scramble egg.” Therefore, to determine whether the Gram Sabha was voluntarily dissolved or not, is merely an academic issue, as this Court will not be able to revive the Gram Sabha which was dissolved vide Annexure P-5 as new Gram Sabha has been elected and is performing its functions. Shri Arun Jain, Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, has raised another argument and has referred to Section 29 of the Act, which reads thus:- “29. Dissolution of Gram Panchayat. (1) If in the State Government, a Gram Panchayat abuses its powers or is not Civil Writ Petition No.19173 of 2008 -: 4 :- competent to perform or makes persistent defaults in the performance of its duties under this Act or willfully disregards any instructions given or directions issued by the Panchayat Samiti or Zila Parishad or any instructions issued by the State Government arising out of the audit of accounts of the Gram Panchayat or inspection of work, the State Government may, after giving the Gram Panchayat an opportunity to render explanation, by an order published, alongwith the reasons thereof, in the Official Gazette, dissolve such Gram Panchayat. (2) When a Gram Panchayat is dissolved under sub-section (1) - (i) Sarpanch, and all Panches shall vacate their offices forthwith; (ii) All powers and duties of the Gram Panchayats during its dissolution, shall be exercised and performed by such person or persons as the State Government may appoint in this behalf; (iii) all property in the possession of the Gram Panchayat shall be held by the State Government. (3) Upon dissolution of Gram Panchayat under sub-section (1), the State Government shall reconstitute a Gram panchayat as specified under section 10 and election to reconstitute such Gram Panchayat shall be completed before the expiration of a period of six months from the date of dissolution: Provided that where the remainder of the period for which the dissolved Gram Panchayat would have continued is less than six months, it shall not be necessary to hold any election under Civil Writ Petition No.19173 of 2008 -: 5 :- this sub-section for reconstituting the Gram Panchayat for such period. (4) Gram Panchayat reconstituted upon the dissolution of the existing Gram Panchayat before the expiration or its duration, shall continue only for the remainder of the period for which the dissolved Gram Panchayat would have continued under section 15 had it not been so dissolved.” Referring to Section 29, Senior Counsel has contended that since the elections of the Gram Sabha was held in June 2008, its tenure will be only for the remainder period of the earlier Gram Sabha, and, this Court should issue a direction that fresh election of the Gram Panchayat should be held in July, 2011. At glance, this argument may look attractive but this Court cannot ignore the mandate of Section 29-A of the Act, which reads as under:- “29-A Dissolution of Gram Panchayat in exceptional circumstances.- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 29, where a Gram Panchayat has completed its term as specified in Section 15 of this Act or election thereto has been announced and the State Government considers it necessary in public interest so to do, it may dissolve a Gram Panchayat by an order published in the Official Gazette. (2) When a Gram Panchayat is dissolved under sub-section (1), (i) Sarpanch and all Panches shall vacate their offices forthwith; (ii) all powers and duties of the Gram Panchayat during its Civil Writ Petition No.19173 of 2008 -: 6 :- dissolution, shall be exercised and performed by such person or persons, as the State Government may appoint in this behalf; (iii) all property in the possession of the Gram Panchayat shall be held by the State Government.” To bring conformity tocommon schedule to the election of all Gram Sabhas in the entire State, in the present case Gram Sabha was dissolved upon the resolution passed by the Gram Sabha. Notification of dissolution, Annexure P-5, specifically states that this has been done in the public interest. It is not the case of the petitioner that the Gram Sabha was dissolved and the election was ordered to be held due to some mala fide reasons. It may be better administrative sense that all elections in the State should be held simultaneously. Gram Sabha, in the present case, was not dissolved for a particular reason that the Panchayat then existing was not favourable to the persons in power. Rather, the need arose because the Panchayat, being the representative of the people, intended to hold fresh elections. Thus, this Court can safely conclude that the dissolution of the Gram Panchayat was under Section 29-A of the Act and fresh elections will be only held when duly constituted Gram Panchayat in year 2008 completes its term of five years. Hence, there is no merit in the present writ petition which is hereby dismissed, with no order as to costs. July 30, 2010. kadyan [Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia] Judge