The petitioner challenged an order changing the reservation category for a Sarpanch seat from Scheduled Caste to General after elections were conducted. The Court held that the order was valid as the initial notification was district-wise, violating block-wise reservation rules.
The petition for quashing the corrigendum was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
C.W.P. No. 14883 of 2008
DATE OF DECISION : 02.09.2008
Paramjit Kaur
.... PETITIONER
Versus
State of Punjab and others
..... RESPONDENTS
CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH
Present: Mr. Mansur Ali, Advocate, for the petitioner.
SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral )
The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order/notification 28.6.2008 (Annexure P-2), passed by Deputy Commissioner, Ludhiana – respondent No.2, on the ground that he has no power to change the notification of the reservation of seat of Sarpanch, after the election of Panches held on 26.5.2008, as also, no reasons have been given for changing the category of reservation.
In this case, earlier vide notification dated 9.5.2008 (Annexure P-1) issued under section 12 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act'), respondent No.2 had reserved the seat of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, village Hambran, Block Sidhwan Bet,
CWP No. 14883 of 2008
-2-
Tehsil Ludhiana West, District Ludhiana, for Scheduled Caste (Woman). The said reservation was made district wise, on the basis of population of the Scheduled Castes in the district. Subsequently, a corrigendum was issued vide the impugned notification dated 28.6.2008, whereby the post of Sarpanch of the aforesaid Gram Panchayat was reserved for General category, instead of Scheduled Caste (Woman). The said reservation was made block-wise in view of sub-rule (3) to Rule 3 of the Punjab Reservation for the Offices of Sarpanches of Gram Panchayats, Chairman and Vice Chairman of Panchayat Samities and Zila Parishads Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as `the Reservation Rules'), which was introduced vide notification dated May 8, 2008. Since the reservation made vide earlier notification (Annexure P-1) was district-wise and was not block-wise in accordance with the Reservation Rules, therefore, the said corrigendum was issued.
It is the case of the petitioner that once the reservation was made by the Deputy Commissioner, then he has no jurisdiction to change the same. A similar controversy came up for consideration before this Court in CWP No. 8468 of 2008, titled as Harmeet Singh Versus Punjab State Election Commission and others, decided on 29.5.2008, in which even the vires of sub-rule (3) to Rule 3 of the Reservation Rules were challenged being ultra vires Article 243 (D) of the Constitution of India or Section 12 (1) of the Act. While upholding the said sub-rule, this Court held that the block-wise reservation made under the said sub-rule was correct and the
CWP No. 14883 of 2008
-3-
corrigendum issued for change of category of reservation was upheld.
In view of the above, we are of the opinion that respondent
No.2 has rightly issued the corrigendum vide impugned notification.
Dismissed.
( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE
September 02, 2008 ( JASWANT SINGH ) ndj JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Deputy Commissioner had jurisdiction to issue a corrigendum changing the category of reservation after the election of Panches.
Whether the block-wise reservation issued under the corrigendum was valid under the Reservation Rules.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Harmeet Singh Versus Punjab State Election Commission and othersReferred¶18
CWP No. 8468 of 2008, Harmeet Singh Versus Punjab State Election Commission and others
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Paramjit Kaur
State of Punjab
Deputy Commissioner, Ludhiana
Satish Kumar Mittal
Jaswant Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
