Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Supreme Court Upholds Disqualification of Sarpanch Over Delay in Submitting Caste Validity Certificate

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment delivered by the Supreme Court of India, the apex court has upheld the disqualification of a Gram Panchayat member for failing to submit a caste validity certificate within the stipulated time. The court’s ruling in the case of Sudhir Vilas Kalel & Ors. Vs. Bapu Rajaram Kalel & Ors. Centered around the implications of not adhering to the mandatory requirements under the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act.

At the heart of the judgment was the interpretation of Sections 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Temporary Extension of Period for Submitting Validity Certificate Act, 2023, which provided an extension to submit caste validity certificates. The Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether the appellant was protected under these sections.

The case involved Sudhir Vilas Kalel, who contested the Gram Panchayat election from a reserved seat and won. However, he failed to submit his caste validity certificate within twelve months of his election, as mandated by law. The issue arose when a no-confidence motion was moved against the Sarpanch, and Kalel’s membership and voting rights were under scrutiny.

Justice K.V. Viswanathan, in his judgment, noted, “The statute and the scheme have been clear. From those who aspire to contest for a reserved seat and who take a risk of applying for the validity certificate by filing an application before the date of nomination, it is prudent to expect that they will show utmost due diligence in the prosecution of their application.” The judgment underscored the mandatory nature of the law, rejecting the notion that mere filing of an application for a validity certificate was sufficient.

The court delved into the interpretation of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act and the Temporary Extension Act, emphasizing the mandatory requirement to submit caste validity certificates for candidates contesting from reserved seats.

The Supreme Court held that Kalel’s failure to submit the validity certificate within the prescribed timeframe led to his automatic disqualification. It affirmed the judgment of the High Court, which had ruled against Kalel, stating that the no-confidence motion against the Sarpanch was validly carried.

Date of Decision: February 07, 2024.

Sudhir Vilas Kalel & Ors. Vs. Bapu Rajaram Kalel & Ors.

 

Latest Legal News