Hold panchayat poll in Feb: HC
Tribune News Service

CHANDIGARH, Dec 27 — Hold elections to panchayats, panchayat samitis, zila parishads and municipalities by the end of February, 2000, positively, except in the case of 92 gram panchayats and 20 municipal committees in which the voters’ list has not been prepared.

This directive was given by the Punjab and Haryana High Court to the Haryana Government and its Election Commission today.

Pronouncing a 12-line order, Mr Justice H.S. Bedi and Mr Justice A.S. Garg told Haryana’s Advocate-General and other counsel that a detailed judgement explaining reasons for this order would be delivered on December 31.

Speaking for the Bench, Mr Justice Bedi said this terse order was based on the reply filed by the Haryana Election Commission to the review petition preferred by Mr Randeep Singh Surjewala, a spokesman and whip of the Legislature Congress Party, and the provisions of Article 243 E of the Constitution, Sections 3, 163 and 164 of the Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, and Article 243-E of the Constitution read with Section 12 of the Haryana Municipal Act, 1973. Although the Haryana Advocate-General urged the Bench to supply him a copy of this order, he did not pray to the Bench for staying the operation of this judgement.

What did the Haryana election Commission say in its affidavit filed before the Bench on December 14? The affidavit filed by the Election Commission’s Secretary said: “Elections to 58 municipal committees and councils may be held in about 45 days’ time after December 20 and those of gram panchayats, panchayat samitis and zila parishads in about 40 days’s time in three phases after December 20, 1999.” The affidavit, however, added that elections to 92 panchayats and 20 municipalities could not be held as electoral rolls had not been completed.

The controversy about the panchayat elections erupted on September 2 with the filing of a writ petition by Mr Bhag Singh, counsel for Mr Surjit Singh, a resident of Nahrishi village in Ambala district’s Naggal constituency, praying for quashing the notification dated April 8 including the voters’ list for Ambala district prepared for the election to gram panchayats, panchayat samitis, zila parishads published on August 7.

This list was not in conformity with the Assembly electoral rolls published on July 21, the petition had alleged.

The former Advocate-General of Haryana had made a statement before the Bench that the voters’ list would be revised before June, 2000. Accepting the plea of the former Advocate-General, the Bench disposed of the petition on September 30 with the direction that the Election Commission “should prepare the electoral rolls in the manner indicated before June, 2000.”

When the Haryana Congress Legislature Party came to know of this decision of the High Court, Mr Surjewala, Mrs Kartar Devi, leader of the Haryana Legislature Congress Party, and certain other persons filed a joint review petition in the High Court praying the court, inter alia, to recall its order dated September 30 and permit them to be impleaded as parties.

In their hard-hitting order, Mr Justice Bedi and Mr Justice Garg had held on December 3 that : “It is agreed between counsel representing the applicants as also the state Election Commission and the incumbent Advocate-General that the order dated September 30, 1999, has been passed in ignorance of the constitutional provisions given in Part IX and Part IX-A of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, and the Haryana Municipal Act, 1973, and has in fact had the effect of negating these provisions by postponing elections to panchayats and local bodies.”

The Bench granted the application preferred by Mr Surjewala and permitted him and other review petitioners to be impleaded as parties. It also recalled the court order of September 30.

On December 23 Mrs Asha Sharma, Financial Commissioner, had filed an affidavit before the Bench suggesting that the government’s should hold panchayat and other local bodies’ election between March 25 and April 10.

Mr Surjewala had, however, opposed this contention on the ground that it was the state governments duty to hold elections to panchayati raj institutions before the expiry of their tenure on January 15.

The Bench had not accepted the plea of the state government to defer panchayat elections till March 25. It had reserved its order after hearing detailed arguments for and against holding the elections before March 25.

Addressing a press conference in the afternoon, Mr Surjewala told mediapersons that the Congress Party’s stand had been upheld by the High Court. The state government should now hold elections to panchayati raj institutions before the Assembly elections.

He revealed that a delegation of the Congress Party would call on the Election Commission this week to request it to schedule panchayat elections in such a manner that these did not clash with the Assembly elections.

Mr Surjewala alleged that the Indian National Lok Dal-BJP combine was not functioning in democratic manner. This was clear from the fact that it was avoiding panchayat elections. He said the Haryana Vidhan Sabha was dissolved on December 14. Therefore, Assembly elections should be held on or before June 13, 2000 — when the constitutional requirement to hold these elections within six months would expire.