Nathu vadla, a small
village of Gujarat with hardly 1000 population flashed in news recently. The coming
panchayat election in this village was to be conducted on the basis of 2001
data. The village has at least 100 Scheduled Castes people and one seat was to
be reserved as per law, but the census data has not been modified and in 2001
the population of SC was nil in the village, the election in 2013 was to be
conducted on the basis of 2001 census. In a shocking judgment, Gujarat High
Court stayed elections in Nathu vadla village saying that it is ‘mockery of
democracy’.
It seems that Gujarat government
is ‘vibrant’ only in allotting land to industrialist and it becomes stagnant
when it comes to empower the weaker sections. Though, this particular judgment
is dealing with anomaly in one village, there may be more such Nathu vadlas, where the ‘babudom’
might not have bothered to modify the data as per latest census.
here, is the judgement:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION
NO. 369 of 2013
PARMAR PRAVINBHAI
MULJIBHAI....Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT &
3....Respondent(s)
Appearance:
MR JV BHAIRAVIA, ADVOCATE
for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for
the Respondent(s) No. 3 4
GOVERNMENT PLEADER for
the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR AMIT J SHAH, ADVOCATE
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for
the Respondent(s) No. 1 2
CORAM: HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE
MOHINDER PAL
Date : 17/01/2013
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL)
1. Draft amendment
granted.
2. It prima facie appears
that as per the petitioner, the population of the Scheduled Caste in Nathuvadla
village is 121 as against the total number of voters of 1099. Therefore, if the
said proportion is considered read with the notification issued by the State
Government for reservation of the seats dated 11.05.2012, there has to be at
least one seat reserved for in the gram panchayat for scheduled caste.
3. The learned AGP Ms.
Thakore appearing for the State Authority concedes to the position that if the
population based on the census of 2010 is considered, one seat may be required
to be reserved but in her submission, such census are not published as that of
2010. She submitted that as per the requirement of the Gujarat Panchayat Act
read with the constitutional provision for making reservation of the seats, the
data or the population figures should have been published. She submitted that
the data which has been published are based on the census of 2001 and as per
those data, the population of scheduled caste is shown as nil in the village in
question and therefore, no seat is reserved for scheduled caste or scheduled
tribe in the particular village.
4. Whereas on behalf of
the State Election Commissioner, Mr.Amit Shah while supporting the stand of the
State Government, contended that the requirement for reservation is that the population
data are published and the basis of reservation would be the data so published.
If the population data is not published even if made in 2010 by the office of
the Registrar General and Census Commissioner, India, Ministry of Home Affairs,
Government of India, even if voter list exists, after considering the censure
of 2010, the reservation cannot be made since such data are not published.
5. In our prima facie
view, it would be a mockery of democratic principles if the elections are to be
held in 2013 from amongst the voters whose names are there up to the last date
of preparation of the voters list, in any case, after 2010 and may be up to
2011, but the seats would be allotted on the basis of the so called census data
published as back as on the census of 2001. The country has gone by 10 years
period and so is for the village. In the year 2010, the population is already
recorded, the data are provisionally published by the Government of India,
Ministry of Home Affairs through office of the Registrar General and Census
Commissioner, India and the same is reflected in the website of Census India, copy
whereof is produced during the course of the hearing. The population data, in
any case as per the census of 2010 are available with the State Government,
therefore the reservations or the allotments of the seats are required to be
made accordingly after considering such data. If those persons who have become
citizen after 2001 and some of them may have become voters during the period
from 2001 to 2010 are ignored for the purpose of making reservation or
allotment of the seat including that of woman candidate, it would frustrate the
basic intention and object of the relevant constitutional provision for giving appropriate
representation to the respective category of the voters or the citizen, may be scheduled
caste, may be scheduled tribe, may be other backward class or may be between
the women candidates amongst the general category. Therefore, in our prima
facie view, such an action would run counter to the democratic principles of
allowing appropriate representation to the appropriate category of the voters
or the citizen, as the case may be. However, as the larger issue for election
of various gram panchayats in the State is not before us and the present
petition is restricted to challenge qua the election of Nathuvadla gram
panchayat, taluka Dhrol, district Jamnagar, the relief could be considered qua
the election of gram panchayat of Nathuvadla only.
6. Hence, the following
order
(a) By interim order, it
is directed that the election of Nathuvadla gram panchayat, taluka Dhrol,
district Jamnagar shall remain stayed of one seat which may ultimately be required
to be reserved for persons belonging to scheduled cast whose population does
exist in the village.
(b) The aforesaid will be
with the additional direction that the election process and ultimate
declaration of the result of the remaining seats of Nathuvadla gram panchayat,
taluka Dhrol, district Jamnagar shall also be subject to the final order which
may be passed by this Court in the present proceedings.
(c) It would be open to
the election authority to identify the seat for whose election is stayed after considering
the population in the respective ward of that particular village.
7. D.S. permitted.
