'Previous Decisions Taken By Gram Panchayat Cannot Be Cancelled Merely Due To Change In Body Of Representatives': Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) has held that a subsequent change in the elected body of a Grampanchayat does not, by itself, justify the cancellation of decisions or resolutions passed by its earlier body. Such an approach would undermine the stability of local administration and is contrary to the purpose of Panchayati Raj institutions.

A Division Bench of Justice Smt. M. S. Jawalkar and Justice Pravin S. Patil was hearing a writ petition filed by Siddharth Iswar Motghare challenging the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Wardha's order of December 22, 2023, which quashed the recruitment of a Peon in Grampanchayat Antargaon. The petitioner, appointed in June 2022 and later confirmed in February 2023, alleged that the cancellation was based on a misapplication of a Government Resolution meant for State Government employees, which is inapplicable to Grampanchayat employees.

The respondent, an unsuccessful candidate who had secured higher marks but was overage under the Bombay Village Panchayats Servants (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1960, claimed his candidature should have been accepted through age relaxation. The Court noted that the post of Peon did not require experience or special qualifications to invoke the relaxation provision and that the respondent had participated in the recruitment despite knowing he was age-barred, thus forfeiting his right to later challenge the process.

The Court also addressed the challenge relating to ambiguity in the advertisement of the recruitment. It observed that though there was an ambiguity in the advertisement, the same cannot be a reason to set aside the entire recruitment exercise.

Finding that the Government Resolution of April 25, 2016, was wrongly applied, and that there was an unexplained delay of over 18 months in challenging the appointment, the Court ruled the recruitment valid. It criticised the Grampanchayat's reversal of its own confirmed appointment merely due to a change in its representatives, stating that proper legal recourse must be taken if earlier resolutions are alleged to be false or fabricated.

“… the Grampanchayat being a local authority, any previous decision/resolution cannot be allowed to cancel only because body representing the Grampanchayat has been changed. If this is allowed, then there will be a chaos in the administration of the Grampanchayat which will be against the object and purpose for which Panchayat are established… there is a procedure incorporated under the provisions of law, if the subsequent body found resolutions passed by the earlier body of the Grampanchayat are false or fabricated, then they have to take proper recourse and then only they can make submissions contrary to the record,” the Court observed.

The Court quashed both the Zilla Parishad's cancellation order and the termination order issued during the pendency of the petition, directing reinstatement of the petitioner with continuity of service and all consequential benefits.

Case Title: Siddharth Iswar Motghare v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. [WRIT PETITION NO. 25 OF 2024]

Click Here To Read/Download Order