Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F7%2F7b%2FSupreme_Court_of_India_01.jpg%2F300px-Supreme_Court_of_India_01.jpg&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSupreme_Court_of_India&t
|
In the case of State of Goa and anr v. Sandeep Vazarkar and ors, the supreme court affirmed the Bombay High Court's ruling rejecting the Goa government's attempt to postpone elections in 186 panchayats in the state. The Bombay high court had directed the state government to hold the elections in 45 days from the date of the order, the Supreme court in this matter felt no need to interfere. As the decision of the Bombay high court was in accordance with article 243E of the Constitution of India. Every Panchayat shall endure for five years from the date set for its first meeting and no longer, unless sooner dissolved under any law already in effect, according to Article 243E of the Indian Constitution.
The same was also upheld in the case of Suresh Mahajan v. State of Madhya Pradesh, where the Supreme Court stated that this was on the verge of the rule of law breaking down and that it was also a clear violation of the Constitution's prohibition on the establishment and operation of such local self-government. The attorney appearing for Goa advised the court that the state was just asking for a month and a half, and that everything will be finished by the end of September. The attorney claimed that the high court had ordered that elections be announced right away and held within 45 days because the Panchayat's term ended on June 18, which is in the heart of monsoon season. He claimed that even relief efforts like the building of a road or financial grants for floods are prohibited after the model code of conduct takes effect, which is before the Budget session in July. The attorney stated that the state government's staff would be involved in these operations while describing the type of rain and flooding that occur there during the monsoon season.
The bench noted throughout the hearing that the state would be eager to move forward with the democratic process. We are more than willing to participate in the electoral process. The procedure will be finished if you give us till the third week of September, according to the state's attorney. The bench declared that the state election commission (SEC) will be free to petition the high court for the necessary instructions in the event of any difficulties. In the interest of justice, we believe it is vital to point out that the state election commission is free to ask the high court for guidance in the event of a problem, the statement stated.
However, the Bombay High Court ruled that the monsoon cannot be used as a justification for delaying elections or ignoring the constitution's directive. The bench of Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice Krishna Murari upheld the verdict of the Bombay High Court while also noting that the State Election Commission could approach the High court for appropriate directives in the interest of justice, but that this appeal would still be rejected.
Tags : #SupremeCourt #stateelections #goa #BombayHC #article243e #45days #elections #panchayat #Highcourt
Allow Cookies!By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
Copyright Kalyan Krishna MediaZ Private Limited. All rights reserved. Unless otherwise indicated, all materials on these pages are copyrighted by Kalyan Krishna MediaZ Private Limited. All rights reserved. No part of these pages, either text or image may be used for any purpose. By continuing past this page, you agree to our Terms of Service, Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy and Content Policies.