Summary
The Supreme Court restored the process for a Special Gram Sabha to consider ratification of a no-confidence motion against a directly elected Sarpanch. No statutory provision made the resolution lapse merely because the administrative timetable had passed, and the Sarpanch could not rely on delay while pursuing challenges to that process. The High Court order was set aside, the Collector was directed to act expeditiously under the statutory scheme, and interim arrangements for the office were specified.
Issues
- Whether a no-confidence resolution lapsed because it was not placed before the Special Gram Sabha within the period asserted from administrative instructions.
Provisions considered
- Section 35-1A, Maharashtra Village Panchayats ActThe modified scheme for a directly elected Sarpanch required ratification by secret ballot before a Special Gram Sabha under an officer appointed by the Collector. (¶ 8-10)
Held
- The Collector’s direction to convene a Special Gram Sabha for ratification conformed to the statutory scheme. The Panchayat resolution alone did not complete the required ratification process. (¶ 8-10)
- No provision was identified under which failure to place the resolution before the Gram Sabha within the asserted time caused statutory lapse. Administrative instructions did not supply such a consequence, particularly where the process had been challenged by the Sarpanch. (¶ 9)
- The parties were restored to the position under the Collector’s order so that ratification formalities could proceed expeditiously. Until then, the office was to be held by the Upa-Sarpanch or governed by another lawful order of the Collector. (¶ 10-11)
Result
Appeal disposed of; High Court judgment set aside and Special Gram Sabha ratification process directed to proceed under the Collector’s order, with interim arrangements for the office.