SHILPA DINESH PARDESHI Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties.

(2.) The Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, in the matter of Mohindar Singh Gill Vs. Chief Election Commissioner of New Delhi, 1978 SCC 405, has referred to pervasive philosophy of the democratic elections which Sir Winston Churchil vivified in matchless words:-

(3.) The provisions relating to conduct and control of elections to Panchayat and Municipalities, grass root level institutions of democracy, find place in parts IX and IX-A respectively of the Constitution of India. The power of superintendence, direction and control for preparation of electoral rolls for, and conduct of, all the elections to Panchayats as well as the Municipalities vest in the State Election Commission consisting of State Election Commissioner to be appointed by the Governor in view of Article 243-K of the Constitution of India. Clause (4) of Article 243-K of the Constitution of India provides that subject to the provisions of this constitution, Legislature of a State may, by law, make provisions with respect to all the matters relating to, or in connection with, elections to Panchayats. Article 243-ZA which relates to election to Municipalities refers to article 243-K. In the matter of A.C. Jose Vs Siven Pillai and others, AIR 1984 SC 921, in para No.25 it is observed thus :