The Act, stipulating educational and other eligibility criteria for
aspiring candidates, was passed by the State legislature on September 7.
According to Section 175 of the Act, the minimum qualification to contest for the post of a sarpanch or panch of a gram panchayat or to that of a member of a panchayat samiti or zilla parishad is class 10 or its equivalent.
For a woman candidate or a candidate belonging to the Scheduled Castes (S.C.s), the minimum qualification shall be middle pass and for an S.C. woman candidate contesting for the post of panch, it shall be fifth pass.
Other disqualifying criteria include failure to pay arrears of any primary agricultural cooperative society, district central cooperative bank or district primary cooperative agriculture and rural development bank, or failure to clear electricity dues.
The Act also stipulates that the candidate give a self-declaration that he/she has a functional toilet at their place of residence
The constitutionality of the Act was challenged in the Supreme Court by three petitioners who stood to be affected by the amendment.
Their contention was that the eligibility criteria were violative of the fundamental rights under Article 14 of the Constitution.
On September 17, the Supreme Court stayed the Bharatiya Janata Party-led (BJP) government from going ahead with the elections, pending final arguments.
On December 12, however, it dismissed the writ petition and upheld the amendment Act.
A review petition has now been filed, arguing that the court had relied on inaccurate and incomplete data to ascertain the numbers and percentages of persons who stood to be disqualified.
The review petition filed by Maanav Kumar and Kirti Singh, advocates for the petitioners, argues that the number of persons who would be disqualified would be much higher than what is thought to be.
The figure of 57 % of people eligible for contesting the elections did not give the disaggregated details and break-up for each category of post, it says.
According to calculations based on the Census figures, the petitioners contend that 55.63 % of non-S.C. men had education below tenth pass; 68.65 % of non-S.C. women were educated below middle pass; 62.16 % of S.C. men and 83.06 %of S.C. women were educated below middle pass, and 67.52 % of S.C. women were educated below primary school pass.
Neither was there any proof given by the government (the respondents) that there was a connection between illiteracy and ill functioning of panchayats on a large scale
Irrespective of the outcome of the review petition, one thing is amply clear. Grass-roots democracy will never be the same. In the previous panchayat elections, 30.06 per cent illiterate candidates, 37.35 per cent under-matriculate candidates, 22.16 per cent matriculates, 7.04 per cent intermediate qualified candidates and 3.33 per cent graduates and postgraduates were elected.
The State government has now decided to introduce similar disqualifying criteria for the urban local body elections too. On December 29, the State Cabinet decided to amend Section 13 A of the Haryana Municipal Act, 1973, and Section 8 of the Haryana Municipal Corporation Act, 1994, requiring all candidates to be matriculates in order to contest urban body elections.
The minimum qualification for women and S.C. candidates is fixed at Class 5. This ironically has been touted as an affirmative action. And similar to the Panchayati Raj Act amendment, a functional toilet too is a prerequisite.
According to Section 175 of the Act, the minimum qualification to contest for the post of a sarpanch or panch of a gram panchayat or to that of a member of a panchayat samiti or zilla parishad is class 10 or its equivalent.
For a woman candidate or a candidate belonging to the Scheduled Castes (S.C.s), the minimum qualification shall be middle pass and for an S.C. woman candidate contesting for the post of panch, it shall be fifth pass.
Other disqualifying criteria include failure to pay arrears of any primary agricultural cooperative society, district central cooperative bank or district primary cooperative agriculture and rural development bank, or failure to clear electricity dues.
The Act also stipulates that the candidate give a self-declaration that he/she has a functional toilet at their place of residence
The constitutionality of the Act was challenged in the Supreme Court by three petitioners who stood to be affected by the amendment.
Their contention was that the eligibility criteria were violative of the fundamental rights under Article 14 of the Constitution.
On September 17, the Supreme Court stayed the Bharatiya Janata Party-led (BJP) government from going ahead with the elections, pending final arguments.
On December 12, however, it dismissed the writ petition and upheld the amendment Act.
A review petition has now been filed, arguing that the court had relied on inaccurate and incomplete data to ascertain the numbers and percentages of persons who stood to be disqualified.
The review petition filed by Maanav Kumar and Kirti Singh, advocates for the petitioners, argues that the number of persons who would be disqualified would be much higher than what is thought to be.
The figure of 57 % of people eligible for contesting the elections did not give the disaggregated details and break-up for each category of post, it says.
According to calculations based on the Census figures, the petitioners contend that 55.63 % of non-S.C. men had education below tenth pass; 68.65 % of non-S.C. women were educated below middle pass; 62.16 % of S.C. men and 83.06 %of S.C. women were educated below middle pass, and 67.52 % of S.C. women were educated below primary school pass.
Neither was there any proof given by the government (the respondents) that there was a connection between illiteracy and ill functioning of panchayats on a large scale
Irrespective of the outcome of the review petition, one thing is amply clear. Grass-roots democracy will never be the same. In the previous panchayat elections, 30.06 per cent illiterate candidates, 37.35 per cent under-matriculate candidates, 22.16 per cent matriculates, 7.04 per cent intermediate qualified candidates and 3.33 per cent graduates and postgraduates were elected.
The State government has now decided to introduce similar disqualifying criteria for the urban local body elections too. On December 29, the State Cabinet decided to amend Section 13 A of the Haryana Municipal Act, 1973, and Section 8 of the Haryana Municipal Corporation Act, 1994, requiring all candidates to be matriculates in order to contest urban body elections.
The minimum qualification for women and S.C. candidates is fixed at Class 5. This ironically has been touted as an affirmative action. And similar to the Panchayati Raj Act amendment, a functional toilet too is a prerequisite.
No comments:
Post a Comment