KISHORI SHIVRAM PARAB Vs. TEHSILDAR VENGURLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the Taluka of Vengurla, there were 27 Grampanchayats. Out of Khanoli and Matond, two additional grampanchayats, namely Pendur and Vayangani came into existence. The total number of Grampanchayats consequently was increased to 29. Prior to the increase, in the year 2000, reservations had been drawn up under which the posts of Sarpanch were reserved in two Grampanchayats for the Scheduled Castes and scheduled Tribes, in seven for the Other Backward Classes, while in the case of six Grampanchayats, posts of the Sarpanch were to be reserved for women. The balance twelve Grampanchayats were to have Sarpanchas from the general category. After two more Grampanchayats were added, the Tahsildar Vengurla decided to alter the reservations by taking into consideration the enlarged number of Sarpanchas available after the division of the existing Grampanchayats. It has been stated that the Tahsildar stipulated that the post of Sarpanch of Village matond which was originally reserved for the Other Backward Classes should now be reserved for women. On 21st September, 2002 a meeting was held by the tahsildar stipulating a revised set of reservations.

(2.) Elections were held for eleven members of the Grampanchayat of matond for which the Grampanchayat came to be divided into four wards. The petitioners are all women from the open category. On 17th January, 2003, the additional Collector, Sindhudurg held a meeting at which it was informed that the election to the office of the Sarpanch would not take place on the basis of the order passed by the Tahsildar on 21st September, 2002. The grievance of the petitioners is that as a result, the order of the Tahsildar by which the office of the sarpanch of the Grampanchayat of Matond was reserved for women, was rescinded and the office came to be reserved for a person belonging to the Other backward Classes. That decision has been challenged in these proceedings under article 226 of the Constitution. The grievance of the Petitioners is that when they contested the election to membership of the Grampanchayat, there was an expectation of the office of the Sarpanch being reserved for women; but that expectation was belied by the subsequent decision.

(3.) An affidavit in reply has been filed in these proceedings in which it has been stated that elections for the posts of Sarpanch and Upa Sarpanch have been completed on 30th January, 2003 and both the Sarpanch and Upa Sarpanch have accordingly been appointed. It has been averred that as a result of the bifurcation of the Grampanchayats of village Matond and village Khanoli, two new grampanchayats of Pendur and Vayangani came into existence. As a result of this increase in the number of Grampanchayats, reservations for the posts of sarpanch had to be modified. The Tahsildar had drawn fresh lots and decided upon the reservation for the four Grampanchayats on 21st September, 2002. However on 17th January, 2003, a districtwise reservation was carried out in accordance with a communication dated 26th December, 2002 of the Rural development and Water Conservation Department. This was decided by the district Collector consequent upon which the earlier reservation prescribed by the Tahsildar in the meeting dated 21st September, 2002 was cancelled.