RAMABHAI CHHIPABHAI KOLI Vs. NATHABHAI MAVJIBHAI PARMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are the members of Vadodara District Panchayat Vadodara and all of them have been elected and appointed as members of the Social Justice Committee by a resolution passed in the general body meeting of the District Panchayat held on 18/05/1981 The legality and validity of the resolution was challenged before the Development Commissioner inter alia on the ground that the Social Justice Committee did not consist of any member of Scheduled Caste and therefore the constitution of the committee was in contravention of the provisions of sec. 131 of the Gujarat Panchayats Act 1961 (hereafter referred to as the Act) and the provisions of Rule 3 of the Gujarat Taluka and District Panchayats Social Justice Committee (Constitution and Functions) Rules 1976 (hereafter referred to as the Rules). The Development Commissioner held that out of ten members of the Social Justice Committee no member belonged to the Scheduled Caste and therefore the constitution of the Committee was bad and hence he ordered to cancel and set aside the resolution Annexure A by which the Social Justice Committee had been constituted by the District Panchayat. The petitioners who are the members of the District Panchayat and who have been elected and appointed as members of the Social Justice Committee have challenged the legality and validity of the order passed by the Development Commissioner.

(2.) It is an admitted position that the total number of elected members of the District Panchayat exceeds 39 and therefore in view of the provisions of Rule 3(1)(ii) of the Rules the Social Justice Committee should consist of ten members. It is also an admitted position that the Committee consists of one member belonging to Bhangi community as required under Rule 3(2)(i) of the Rules. The dispute is with regard to the remaining nine members. This aspect is governed by Rule 3(2)(ii) of the Rules.

(3.) It is not in dispute that the committee consists of ten members nine of them are elected members while one member belonging to Bhangi community has been coopted as required under Rule 3(2)(i) of the Rules. It is also not in dispute that one member of the Committee is female as required under proviso to Rule 3(2)(ii) of the Rules It is also not in dispute that all the nine members belong to scheduled Tribe. Relying on the provisions of sec. 131 of the Act and the provisions of Rule 3(2)(ii) of the Rules it is contended that there should be some members belonging to Scheduled Caste and if the committee does not consist of any member belonging to Schedule Caste the constitution of the Committee would be illegal and void. The aforesaid contention found favour with the Development Commissioner and therefore he held the resolution by which the Committee has been constituted to be illegal and void. The provisions governing the constitution of the Social Justice Committee are to be found in sec. 131 of the Act and the relevant part of which is reproduced hereinbelow: