Dismissed

P.Baskar v. Government of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC8 Nov 2019WP/17959/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that the District Collector must consider an Enquiry Committee report showing only 59 ST voters rather than 2011 census data when reserving a Panchayat seat, directing fresh assessment if needed to adhere to reservation rules.

What did the court decide?

Directed the third respondent to consider the Enquiry Committee report and make a fresh assessment before deciding on reservation.

P.Baskar Vs Government of Tamil Nadu — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated:08.11.2019

¶3

Coram:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN

¶5

Writ Petition No.17959 of 2019

¶6

and W.M.P.No.17369 of 2019

¶7

P.Baskar .. Petitioner

¶8

/versus/

¶9

1.Govt.of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Secretary, Rural Development & Panchayat Raj, Fort St.George,Chennai-9.

¶10

2.Government of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Directorate of Rural Development & Panjayat Raj Department, Panagal Building, Chennai-15.

¶11

3.The District Collector, Kanchipuram District. .. Respondents

¶12

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to take into account the report of the committee dated 29.07.2016 constituted by the 3^rd respondent regarding ST voters in Kolathur Village Panchayat, the Tamil Nadu Panchayat (Reservation of Seats and Rotation of Reserved Seat)Rules 1995 and the judgment of this Court before finalizing the reservation for the Kolathur Panchayat President Post, under Sriperumbudur Panchayat Union.

¶13

For Petitioner :Mr.J.Srinivasa Mohan For Respondents:Mr.N.Inbanathan, AGP -----

¶14

1/6

¶15

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

This Writ Petition has been filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to take into account the report of the committee dated 29.07.2016 constituted by the 3^rd respondent regarding ST voters in Kolathur Village Panchayat, the Tamil Nadu Panchayat (Reservation of Seats and Rotation of Reserved Seat)Rules 1995 and the judgment of this Court before finalizing the reservation for the Kolathur Panchayat President Post, under Sriperumbudur Panchayat Union.

¶18

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶19

3.The grievance of the petitioner is that despite a specific direction of this Court passed in W.P.No.33984 of 2016 dated 04.10.2016 directing the State Election Commission to issue fresh notifications for conducting the election after considering the complaints regarding reservaton, de-reservation of posts, deletion or addition of genuine eligible voters and enrolment of bogus voteres etc., before conducting election, and also a clear report by the Enquiry Committee that there are only 59 ST voteres in Kolathur Panchayat, the respondents are trying to reserve the panchayat for ST candidates, when there are other constituency which have more ST population.

¶20

The petitioner has mentioned some of the panchayats, which have more ST population and referring the Rule of reservation, contents that the reservation for ST candidates should be made to the panchayat,, which has highest ST population in the District. While there are five other panchayats, which have more than ST population than the population of the Kolathur panchayat, the respondents are trying to reserve the Kolathur Panchayat for ST candidates. Hence, the present writ petition is filed seeking Mandamus to take into account the report of the Enquiry Committee dated 29.07.2016 consituted by the third respondent regarding the ST voters in Kolathur village panchayat and then reserve the seat as per the Tamil Nadu Panchayats (Reservation of Seats and Rotation of Reserved Seats) Rules, 1995.

¶21

In the counter, the third respondent has stated that as per 2011 census, the Kolathur Panchayat have more ST population comparing to the other 58 panchayats in the Kancheepuram District. In the counter, the third respondent has also extracted the population statistics of the Districts. Regarding the report dated 29.07.2016, the third respondent is

¶22

2/6

¶23

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶24

sceptical about the report and state that the respondents are intended to follow the census of 2011 and not the date given in the report.

¶25

6.The said stand of the thid respondent goes contrary to the observation of this Court in Dravida Munnertra Kazhagam represented by its Organisation Secretary, R.S.Bharathi vs. The Secretary to Government, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Secretariate, Fort St.George, Chennai reported in (2016) 7 MLJ 772 confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1268 of 2016 vide order dated 01.08.2017.

¶26

There is a specific direction of this Court to make proper enquiry regarding the limitation and de-limitation of the constituency, based on the voters. Pursuant to the order, enquiry was conducted and the equiry report indicates that there are only 59 ST voters in the Kolathur Village Panchayat. Therefore, the third resondent cannot go back to 2011 census and so that there are 203 voters in the said constitutency reserve the said constituency for ST voters.

¶27

In view of the above, the third respondent is directed to consider the Enquiry Committee report dated 29.07.2016 and if necessary, shall make a fresh assessment and then take a decision on reserving the constituency as per the Tamil Nadu Panchayats (Reservation of Seats and Rotation of Reserved Seats) Rules, 1995.

¶28