DRAVIDA MUNNETRA KAZHAGAM (DMK) vs. SECRETARY GOVERNORS SECRETARIAT AND ORS

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION        IA No. 182868/2019 in CIVIL APPEAL  NOS.  5467­5469/2017        

WITH  M.A. No.2328/2019 in W.P.(C) No.1267/2018 (With IA No. 183503/2019 and  IA No. 183515/2019 and  IA No. 163332/2019 and IA No. 183506/2019 and I.A. Nos.186721 and 186722 of 2019 and I.A. No.185943 of 2019) WITH   Contempt Petition (C) Diary No(s).38969/2019 in W.P.(C) No.1267/2018  WITH W.P.(C)  No.1411/2019  (IA No.183815/2019, IA No.185955/2019, IA No.183813/2019) WITH W.P.(C) No.1415/2019 WITH  W.P.(C) No.1413/2019  (I.A. No. 183819/2019) Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by CHARANJEET KAUR Date: 2019.12.06 12:15:11 IST Reason: WITH W.P.(C) No.1418/2019  Page  | 1 WITH W.P.(C) No. 1417/2019  (IA No.185986/2019 and IA No.185985/2019) WITH W.P.(C) No. 1420/2019 (IA No.185976/2019 and IA No.185974/2019) AND Writ Petition (C) Diary No.43683 of 2019   JUDGMENT These   Interlocutory   Applications   have   been   filed   seeking directions for compliance with the Constitutional mandate concerning elections   to   local   bodies.   The   lead   applicant,   Dravida   Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), is appellant in the Civil Appeal Nos. 5467­5469 of 2017, wherein an order of the Madras High Court refusing to issue certain directions to the Tamil Nadu State Election Commission (“State Election Commission”) is under challenge before us. It is also the principal Opposition party in the Legislative Assembly of the State of Tamil Nadu and is a recognised State­party.  2.  In the Civil Appeal DMK claimed that the party­in­power at the State level, the AIADMK, has deliberately been postponing elections; unconstitutionally been altering constituencies and  refusing to effect rotation with the object of gaining undue political advantage. They Page  | 2 have   claimed   that   Articles   243­D   and   243­T   mandated   that delimitation of constituencies be conducted after every decadal census and concomitant reservations be effected for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes on a ‘rotation’ basis. In so far as the Tamil Nadu Panchayats (Second Amendment) Act, 2016 allowed the next cycle of local elections in Tamil Nadu to be conducted as per the earlier 2001 Census, it contravened Constitutional provisions and was thus liable to be struck down. 3.  The aforestated issues have, however, been rendered academic by     constitution   of   a   Delimitation   Commission   under   the   newly enacted   Tamil   Nadu   Delimitation   Commission   Act,   2017.   This th Commission   initiated   an   elaborate   exercise   of   delimitation   on   25 July,   2017   and   eventually   formulated   a   draft   ward   delimitation th proposal on 20  September, 2017. Thereafter, written objections were invited  from  the  public,  various  political  parties and  organisations th th between   20   December,   2017   and   18   January,   2018.   After considering   such   objections/suggestions   and   the   revised   proposals received   from   District   Delimitation   Authorities,   the   Delimitation Commission sent its final recommendation to the State Government st on 31   August,   2018. Thereafter, a notification was issued by the th State Government on 14  December, 2018 whereby the wards newly delimited per the 2011 Census figures were notified. Page  | 3 th 4. Thereafter, on 20  February, 2019 the Delimitation Commission forwarded proposals for reservation, whereupon post consideration, th st the State Government vide notifications dated 20   May, 2019, 21 th May, 2019 and 24   May, 2019 notified reserved seats for rural and urban local bodies in the State. th 5. It is noteworthy that soon after on 12  November, 2019 the State Government issued a notification  dividing  four  existing  districts of Tamil   Nadu   to   create   nine   new   districts.   Vellore   district   was trifurcated   into   the   districts   of   Vellore,   Tirupathur   and   Ranipet; Kancheepuram was bifurcated into Kancheepuram and Chengalpet; Villupuram   was   bifurcated   into   Villupuram   and   Kallakurichi;   and Tirunelveli   was   bifurcated   into   Tirunelveli   and   Tenkasi   districts. Resultantly,   some   talukas   were   also   re­structured   with   certain revenue   villages   either   being   added   or   removed.   Para   7   of   the aforestated notification then reads as follows: “7. The delimitation of the territorial wards of Village Panchayats, Panchayat   Union   and   District   Panchayats   have   already   been notified under the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 (Tamil Nadu Act 21 of 1994) and thereby the delimitation exercise for the ensuing   local   body   elections   has   already   been   completed. Notwithstanding the notification to bifurcate the Districts, the process   started   already   to   conduct   the   ensuing   Local   Body Elections   will   be   continued   as   per   the   order   of   the   Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 17.07.2019  in W.P. (C) No. 1267/2018. After   the   ensuing   Local   Body   Elections,   the   process   of Page  | 4 modification, if any, with regard to local bodies will be taken up by the Government.” 6. As   is   apparent   from   the   above   extract,   there   is   a   pointed th reference to this Court’s order dated 17   July, 2019 in W.P.(C) No. 1267 of 2018. This Order was delivered in M.A. No. 2328 of 2019 which was filed by the State Election Commission and reads as under: “On   2nd   July,   2019,   this   Court   had   passed   the   following order:­  “The   respondent   No.1,   the   Tamil   Nadu   State   Election Commission,   shall   file   an   affidavit   within   two   weeks hence, indicating the time within which the delimitation exercise that is stated to be at an advance stage, will be completed and when elections to the local bodies can be held.”  List the matter on 17th July, 2019.  Pursuant thereto, an affidavit dated 15th July, 2019, has been filed by the Secretary, Tamil Nadu State Election Commission. We have perused the said affidavit and we are satisfied with the grounds mentioned therein, which explain the delay in completion   of   the   delimitation   exercise   and   in   issuing   the notification in respect of local bodies elections. We have also taken note of the fact that in paragraph 28, the Secretary of the State Election Commission has stated that the notification announcing the schedule of the election will be published in the last week of October, 2019. In view of the aforesaid statement made before the Court in the   affidavit   filed   by   the   Secretary   of   the   State   Election Page  | 5 Commission,   we   permit   the   State   authority   to   act   in   the manner   as   undertaken   before   the   Court   i.e.   publish   the election notification in the last week of October, 2019.........” th 7. Thereafter   this   Court   passed   the   following   order   on   18 November, 2019. “List on 13.12.2019, by which time we hope and expect that Notification will be issued after completing all legal formalities. Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, learned Senior Counsel states that   there   are   some   connected   matters,   i.e.,   SLP(C)   Nos. 28881­28883/2016 and batch. List all the connected matters together before the appropriate Bench, after obtaining orders from Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India.” 8. In   purported   deference   to   the   above   reproduced   Orders,   the nd State Election Commission on 2   December, 2019 announced the Programme of Elections for all Panchayats at the village, intermediate and district levels, which is as follows: PROGRAMME OF ELECTION

Page  | 6

9. The notified election programme further provides as follows: “ Posts for Direct Elections: Direct election would be held to fill up the total of 1,18,974  posts in Rural Local bodies, out of which   655 Posts of Village Panchayat Ward members within 31 District Panchayats;  6,471 Posts of Panchayat Union Ward Members within 388 Panchayat Unions;  12,524 Posts of Village Panchayat Presidents and 99,324 posts of Village Panchayat Ward Members are included. Political   Party   Based   Elections   and   Non­political   Party based Elections: The election to the posts of Village Panchayat Presidents and Village Panchayat Ward Members will be as Non­Political Party based Elections; the election to the posts of District Panchayat Ward Members and Panchayat Union Ward Members will be as Political party based Election. Page  | 7 Indirect Elections: Indirect   Elections   to   the   following   posts   will   be   held   on 11.01.2020   through   the   elected   representatives   of   the   local bodies.

10. It thus emerges that before the election process could begin as nd per the Sate Election Commission’s Press Release dated 2  December, 2019, the State of Tamil Nadu increased the number of districts from 31 to 39 and also restructured various talukas. However, with regard to   posts   of   Chairman   and   Vice­Chairman   of   District   Panchayat Councils, elections are still sought to be held only for 31 posts. This resultant   incongruity   has     prompted   the   appellants   to   file   these nd applications with prayers to strike down the Notification dated 2 December, 2019; hold elections for the entire State comprising all 39 Revenue Districts; and conduct such local body elections only after Page  | 8 completion of all legal formalities i.e. after delimitation of the newly carved   districts.   A   specific   direction   has   also   been   prayed   for,   to compel the respondents to first carry out delimitation, reservation, rotation   processes   and   fulfil   all   other   legal   requirements   before notifying   or   conducting   elections   of   any   panchayat   at   the   village, intermediate or district level. 11. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at a considerable length and after an indepth analysis of various Statutory provisions as well   as   the   constitutional   scheme   under   Part   IX   which   envisages democratisation of grass­root level administration, we are of the view that,   as   per   Article   243­B,     panchayats   have   to   mandatorily   be constituted in a State at  the village, intermediate and district levels. Article 243­C requires the State, as far as is practicable, to maintain a similar ratio between the population residing within the territory of a particular panchayat and the number of seats allocated to it, across all panchayats in the State. Further, each panchayat must be divided into   territorial   constituencies   and   per   Article   243­D,   seats   in proportion to their population must be reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in each panchayat. 12. It is thus clear that the constitutional object of Part IX cannot be effectively achieved unless the delimitation exercise for constitution of local bodies at all levels is properly undertaken. Such exercise in the Page  | 9 State of Tamil Nadu must keep in view the criteria for delimitation of wards  prescribed  under  the  Tamil Nadu   Local  Bodies Delimitation Regulations,   2017   (formulated   under   the   Tamil   Nadu   Delimitation Commission Act, 2017), which criteria must itself not be contrary to Article 243­C read with Article 243­B(1) of the Constitution. 13. Noticing how at the completion of the delimitation process there were only 31 revenue districts, but despite a subsequent increase in number of districts to 39, no fresh delimitation exercise has been undertaken, it is clear that the State Government cannot fulfil the aforestated   Constitutional   mandate.   There   is   no   identified   data elucidating population proportions  and hence requisite reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes cannot be provided for, both in re village panchayat wards or Chairman/Vice­Chairman of District bodies. We hence have no doubt that the election process as notified nd by the State Election Commission on 2  December, 2019, in respect of the   newly   constituted   nine   districts   cannot   be   held   unless   fresh delimitation exercise in respect thereto is first completed. The State Government cannot justify holding local body elections of these nine th districts by relying upon this Court’s order dated 18  November, 2019 as the said order itself mandates notification of elections only after completing “all legal formalities”. Page  | 10 14. The contention of the respondents that the present proceedings amount   to   “calling   in   question   an   election”   and   hence   not   being maintainable in view of the express constitutional embargos of Articles 243­O and 243­ZG does not impress us for the present proceedings are only to further the expeditious completion of pre­requisites of a fair   election.   Hence,   the   following   ratio   of   a   coordinate   Bench   in Election Commission of India v. Ashok Kumar and Others [2000  squarely applies to the present case: (8) SCC 216] “(2)   Any decision sought and rendered will not amount to “calling in question an election” if it subserves the progress of the   election   and   facilitates   the   completion   of   the   election. Anything  done towards completing or in furtherance of the election proceedings cannot be described as questioning the election. (3) Subject to the above, the action taken or orders issued by Election Commission are open to judicial review on the well­ settled parameters which enable judicial review of decisions of statutory bodies such as on a case of mala fide or arbitrary exercise of power being made out or the statutory body been shown to have acted in breach of law. (4) Without   interrupting,   obstructing   or   delaying   the progress   of   the   election   proceedings,   judicial   intervention   is available if assistance of the court has been sought for merely to correct or smoothen the progress of the election proceedings, to remove the obstacles therein, or to preserve a vital piece of evidence if the same would be lost or destroyed or rendered Page  | 11 irretrievable by the time the results are declared and stage is set for invoking the jurisdiction of the court.” 15. For the reasons aforestated, these applications are allowed in part and disposed of with the following directions: a. The Respondent­authorities shall hold elections to all Panchayats   at     village,   intermediate   and   district   levels, except those in the following nine reconstituted districts: i. Kancheepuram ii. Chengalpattu iii. Vellore iv. Thirupathur v. Ranipet vi. Villupuram vii. Kallakurichi viii. Tirunelveli ix. Tenkasi; b. The   Respondents   (including   the   Delimitation Commission)   are   directed   to   delimit   the   nine   newly­ constituted districts in accordance with law and thereafter hold   elections   for   their   panchayats   at   the   village, intermediate   and   district   levels   within   a   period   of   four months; c. There shall be no legal impediment against holding elections for Panchayats at the village, intermediate and district levels for rest of the districts; d. State Election Commission shall notify elections for the panchayats at village, intermediate and district levels in respect   of   all   districts   except   the   nine   re­constituted districts as per the details given in direction ‘a’ above.; Page  | 12 e. While   conducting   elections,   the   respondents   shall provide   proportionate   reservation   at   all   levels,   in accordance   with   the   Rule   6   of   Tamil   Nadu   Panchayats (Reservation   of   Seats   and   Rotation   of   Reserved   Seats) Rules, 1995. 16. In all fairness, we must note that the learned Advocate General of Tamil Nadu has also agreed to proceed with the election process as directed above. 17.  Since, the only grievance raised in the main appeals was that the local body elections ought be held on the basis of the 2011 Census and not of 2001; and considering how the respondents have already used   the   2011   Census   while   conducting   the   latest   delimitation exercise   (except   in   the   newly   re­constituted   nine   districts),   these appeals   have   been   rendered   infructuous   and   are   disposed   of accordingly. 18. All pending I.As. also stand disposed of accordingly. ……………………….. CJI.    (S. A. BOBDE)   ………………………… J. (B.R. GAVAI) …………………………. J. (SURYA KANT) NEW DELHI DATED : 06.12.2019 Page  | 13