Calcutta High Court orders ST candidate from minority party to be appointed Pradhan so reservation law is not frustrated

The Calcutta High Court on October 10, Tuesday, paved the way for the appointment of an elected woman candidate who belonged to a Scheduled Tribe (ST) and was from a minority political party as the Pradhan of a Gram Panchayat to ensure that the reservation policy for such a post was not flouted [Srimanta Malik vs State of West Bengal]..Justice Amrita Sinha reasoned that if the benefit of reservation is not given to an elected reserved category candidate, the reservation policy itself would be defeated. ."If the elected reserved category candidate is not allowed the benefit of reservation, then the reservation policy will be frustrated. Reserved category member elected from the minority party will never get a chance to hold key posts and seats," the Court said. .The Court added that the members enjoying the political majority should not make things difficult for the ST candidate, only because she is from a political party that won the minority of seats. "After the elections are over, all the members of the Gram Panchayat ought to act in tandem with each other and ought not to oppose the action of the member belonging to a rival political party. The sole intention of the members of the Gram Panchayat should be to act as a team and serve the electors of the Panchayat. There ought not to be any infighting in between the members and the Panchayat should behave as a single entity," the Court added..The Court passed the order after noting that the post of the Pradhan was reserved for an ST individual and that the woman in question was the only candidate from the reserved category..The woman's appointment to the post had been opposed by 17 other elected candidates, who were members of the political party that emerged as the majority party after the elections. The 17 candidates moved a petition in the High Court claiming that the woman candidate did not enjoy the confidence of the majority of members of the 22-member Gram Panchayat. Thus, she should not be allowed to head the Panchayat, they argued. Justice Sinha replied that if this contention were accepted, it would become practically impossible to follow the reservation policy prescribed under the Constitution of India. Further, the judge observed that when reserved party candidates are not allowed to hold reserved posts, bye-elections have to be held."To prevent mid-term elections, the elected member ought to be permitted to hold office. Co-option ought not to be exercised if the reserved category candidate is available. If none is available from the reserved category, then co-option may be resorted to," the Court added. .The bench further refused to accept the contention of the petitioners (the 17 other elected candidates) that they would not accept the woman candidate as a Pradhan even for a single day. The Court responded by emphasising that the woman must be given an opportunity to prove her credibility. "Prior to giving her an opportunity to serve the people, she ought not to be taken as an incompetent person to assume the office of Pradhan," the bench said..The judge also refused to accept an allegation that the woman had failed to attend a meeting earlier when the members of the Panchayat were to appoint the Pradhan. Rather, the Court observed that she appeared to have been restrained from attending the meeting and was even compelled to approach the police for help. .Justice Sinha proceeded to opine that the woman must be permitted to hold the post of Pradhan. She added that if the woman is found incompetent or fails to win confidence even after a year, then there were provisions for the removal of the Pradhan that may be resorted to. .With these observations, the bench dismissed a plea filed by the majority party candidates (petitioners)..Advocates Kallol Basu and Suman Banerjee appeared for the petitioners.Advocates Samrat Choudhury and Abhijeet Bhattacharyya represented the minority party members.Advocates Lalit Mohan Mahata and Ziaul Haque represented the State government..[Read Judgment]