KRISHNA KUMAR MISHRA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The controversy relating to reservation in the matter of education and service, which started since 1951, was ultimately set at rest in the end of 1992, by the Supreme Court in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India, AIR 1993 SC 477.Immediately thereafter, by the Constitution's (73rd Amendment) Act, 1992, a new principle of reservation has been laid down under Article 243D of Constitution of India, in the matter of Panchayat election. The Respondent-State of Bihar then came out with Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (for short 'Panchayat Act, 1993'). The aforesaid Constitutional Amendment and Panchayat Act, 1993 have now given rise to the new controversy relating to 'reservation in Panchayat election'. By the aforesaid 73rd Amendment of Constitution, followed by Panchayat Act, 1993, a new Provision has been laid down, reserving seats in favour of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward class persons, in the matter of Panchayat election. As to whether such reservation of seats in the matter of Panchayat election is permissible or not, is the main issue in the present writ petitions.

(2.) The petitioners of C.W.J.C. 3351/94 have challenged a part of Article 243D of Constitution, to the extent clause (6) is concerned. They have also challenged Sections 13, 15 and 36 of Panchayat Act, 1993. The validity of the total constitutional provisions of Article 243D is also under challenge in C.W.J.C. 10716/95. In the said writ petition, other provisions like Sections 38, 63, 69 and 91 of Panchayat Act, 1993 are also under challenge, apart from other sections. In one of the writ petitions (C.W.J.C. 11414/94), apart from the aforesaid challenges, Schedule-I of Panchayat Act, 1993, has also been challenged. The said Schedule-I contains list of Backward class. A provision relating to formation of Gram Kutchery (Village Court) which has been included under Chapter-VI of Panchayat Act, 1993, is also under challenge in C.W.J.C. 6853/95. In the rest of the writ petitions, one or other aforesaid provisions are under challenge.

(3.) Before dealing the matter, it is to be taken into note that there is acute paucity of precedence of Supreme Court and High Courts, directly covering the issue, in question. However, from some of the decisions of the Supreme Court, relating to reservation, including the last decision in Indra Sawhney, AIR 1993 SC 477, and a decision of Full Bench of this Court in Janardan Paswan, AIR 1988 Patna 75, it appears that certain similar question have been dealt with therein.