SDM cannot halt Panchayat polls over ‘money power’ fears, rules Himachal HC
Photo used for indicative purpose only. Source internet
Shimla, Sep 5
Himachal Pradesh High Court has drawn a clear line on executive interference in Panchayati Raj elections, ruling that an SDM couldn’t put an election on hold merely because of allegations of horse-trading, money power or apprehension of corrupt practices.
Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, in a judgment delivered on August 6, held that the Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil), Indora, had exceeded his statutory powers by deferring the election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Indora Panchayat Samiti while a police inquiry into allegations of electoral malpractice was pending.
Also Read
Tight contest looms for Shimla ZP Chairmanship after tense oath-taking ceremony
The court described the SDM’s action as “wholly untenable, manifestly illegal and contrary to rule of law”, holding that it “lacks statutory backing” and “exceeds the power conferred upon him as an Executive Magistrate.”
The ruling assumes significance in the backdrop of the State administration itself failing to complete the election process for the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Shimla Zila Parishad.
On two occasions, meetings for holding the election were convened, but the election could not be completed. The situation raises questions over the manner in which the executive machinery is handling the constitution and functioning of elected Panchayati Raj institutions.
The High Court case arose after elections to the Panchayat Samiti, Indora, Kangra, were held in May and 26 members were declared elected. Though all members subsequently took oath, the election of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman was withheld after a complaint alleged illegal monetary inducements and attempts to influence members.
The State sought to justify the delay, arguing that the SDM, as Executive Magistrate, could intervene to ensure a free, fair and transparent election and invoke provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).
Also Read
A day before Panchayat election SEC cracks whip on ineligible candidates
The High Court rejected the argument, holding that the BNSS provisions relied upon by the State did not confer power on the authorised officer to override the specific mandate of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act and Election Rules.
The court stressed that under Section 79 of the Panchayati Raj Act, elected members have to elect their Chairman and Vice-Chairman immediately after taking oath.
Allegations of corrupt practices cannot be used by an executive officer as a ground to stall the election. The Act provides a separate statutory mechanism, including an election petition, to challenge an election.
Significantly, the police inquiry in the Indora case found no material evidence substantiating allegations of horse-trading, money power or illegal inducement.
The High Court further observed that preventing elected members from choosing their office-bearers “virtually amounts to an action for thwarting the functioning of a democratically elected institution” and is “antithetical to the democratic set up of the local self governance.”
Holding that electoral grievances must be addressed through the prescribed statutory mechanism and “not through executive fiat,” the court directed that the election meeting be conducted in accordance with law.
It also ordered circulation of the judgment to all authorised officers dealing with Panchayati Raj elections across Himachal Pradesh.
HC ruling puts spotlight on executive interference in local-body elections; Shimla Zila Parishad chairman, vice-chairman polls too await completion despite meetings being convened twice
About the Author
