Manipur High Court strikes down law allowing panchayat members to continue in office beyond 5 years

The Manipur High Court on Friday set aside a nearly three-decade-old amendment to the state’s Panchayat Raj Act that allowed panchayat members to continue in their posts even after the expiry of their five-year term [Mayanglambam Joykumar Singh & Anr v The State of Manipur & Ors]. 

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Kempaiah Somashekar and Justice A Guneshwar Sharma ruled that the 1996 amendment to Section 22(3) of the Manipur Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 was violative Article 243E of the Indian Constitution and was absurd. 

The Court restored the law to its original avatar, stating that the term of panchayat members shall expire after five years. 

“In the circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the amendment of Manipur Panchayati Raj (Amendment) Act, 1996 to the Manipur Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 with respect to replacing the word ‘cease’ in Section 22(3) of the original Act by word ‘continue’ is ultra vires the provision of Article 243E and in violation of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court and High Courts,” the Court held. 

The Bench exercised its powers of reading down the statute to place the word “cease” back in the provision. 

“In order to save the Amendment Act of 1996, this Court resort to the doctrine of ‘reading down’ by restoring the original word ‘cease’ in Section 22(3) of the Act of 1994, thereby preventing the situation where the elected members of the Panchayat can continue till next election is notified,” the Court held.

It delivered the judgement while dealing with a batch of petitions challenging the 1996 amendment to Section 22(3) of the Manipur Panchayat Rat Act, 1994. 

The original Section 22 provided that if the election to the panchayat cannot be conducted for any reason, the Deputy Commissioner has the power to appoint an administrative committee consisting of members to be elected as members to the panchayat or administrator for a period not exceeding six months. 

Section 22(3), before amendment, stated that the elected members of the gram panchayat shall ‘cease’ to be members of the Gram Panchayat upon appointment of the administrative committee or administrator, and all the powers and duties of the gram panchayat shall be exercised by the administrative committee or administrator. 

However, by introducing the Manipur Panchayat Raj (Amendment) Act, 1996, the word ‘cease’ in Section 22(3) was replaced with the word ‘continue’, and the word ‘administrator’ was deleted. 

The amendment meant that the deputy commissioner could appoint an administrative committee to manage the affairs of the gram panchayat, but at the same time, the oanchayat members will continue in their posts.

In a detailed judgement, the High Court ruled that the amendment resulted in duality as expired members continued in office, while an administrative committee exercised panchayat's powers. 

“The amendment in Section 22(3) of replacing the word ‘cease’ by ‘continue’ does not serve any fruitful purpose except for creating a confusion, absurdity and anomaly of having dual bodies for the same office,” the Court observed. 

Ultimately, the High Court upheld the removal of the word administrator but reintroduced the word "cease" in place of continue in Section 22(3).

Meanwhile, on the same day, the same Division Bench through a separate judgement overturned the orders of a single-judge that allowed panchayat and zilla parishad members, whose tenure had expired, to continue in office until new elections were held. 

The Division Bench reiterated that the term of the gram panchayat cannot exceed five years and held that all the voters of a gram panchayat, not just panchayat members, are eligible to be appointed as members of the administrative committee under Section 22 of the Manipur Panchayat Raj Act.

“Section 109 of the Manipur Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 is a general clause empowering the authority to remove difficulties and in doing so, the Authority has no power to appoint Administrative Committee beyond the period of 6 months and/or till the election are notified,” the Court added.

Further, it set aside all the orders of appointment of the administrative committee of the gram panchayat and the administrator for zilla parishad, issued by the State government, for a period of more than six months.  

The State has been ordered to hold elections to these panchayats within six months. 

[Read Judgements]