PUSHPA PRAKASH KALPANDE Vs. COLLECTOR AMRAVATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD all the learned Counsel.

(2.) THE short point which arises for consideration in this petition is whether the third respondent who has been elected as a member of Gram Panchayat Jawala (Bk.) in Tahsil Anjagoan Surji from the seat reserved for woman O. B. C. is ineligible to contest the election for the Sarpanch of the said Gram Panchayat, which post, as per the roaster settled in accordance with the 1964 Rules for Election of the Sarpanch and Upsarpanch under the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, has been reserved for the woman General category. A perusal of the notice at Annexure C dated 21st August, 1995 shows that in accordance with the said roaster, the post of Sarpanch of Jawala (Bk.) Gram Panchayat (item No. 37 in notice at Annexure C) has been reserved for "woman General Category". The petitioner is undoubtedly elected as a member of the Gram Panchayat from the seat reserved for General category (Woman ). Relying upon the decision of the Apex Court in (Saraswati Devi v. Shanti Devi) A. I. R. 1997 S. C. 347, it was sought to be contended that in order to be eligible to contest the election for the post of Sarpanch reserved for woman belonging to General category, it was necessary for the third respondent to have seen initially elected as a Member of the Gram Panchayat from such category alone, namely, to seat reserved for woman General category. In as much as the third respondent has been elected to a seat reserved for O. B. C. (Woman), the petitioner contended that she was ineligible to contest for the post of Sarpanch reserved for woman General category.

(3.) THE point is no longer res-integra in view of the subsequent larger Bench decision of the Apex Court in (Kasambhai P. Ghanchi v. Chandubhai Pajput and others) Civil Appeal No. 8279 of 1997 arising out of S. L. P. (Civil) No. 17369 of 1997) decided on 25th November, 1997 reported in 1998 (1) Mh. L. J. 1 (S. C. ). The Apex Court has considered its earlier judgment in Saraswati Devis case and has categorically held that the conclusions reached in Saraswati Devis case did not flow from the language of the relevant provisions and was not consistent with the concept of reservation. It has, therefore, been declared that Saraswati Devis case did not lay down the correct law. Apex Court has now categorically stated that : "just as all members of the Municipality, irrespective of the fact whether they had been elected to a reserved seat or not, are eligible for election to the post of the President when it falls in the General category, similarly when as per the roster the President is to be one who, say, belongs to the category of Scheduled Caste then all members of the Municipality who are scheduled caste, irrespective of the seat to which they had been elected, would be eligible to stand for election. " It has further been observed as under :