STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. ETC. ETC. versus PRADHAN SANGH KSHETIRA SAMITI AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

Citation: [1995] 2 S.C.R. 1015 · Decided: 24-03-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P.B. SAWANT · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

t 
STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. ETC. ETC. 
v. 
PRADHAN SANGH KSHETIRA SAMITI AND ORS. ETC. ETC. 
MARCH 24, 1995 
[P.B. SAWANT AND S.C. AGRAWAL., JJ.) 
Constitution of India-Arts.40 and 243 (g)-Village-Definition of-
Governor can declare any populated rnral area as a village-It does not stick 
to any particular concept or any pre-conceived notion of village. 
Constitution of India-Art.243(g)-U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947-Sec-
tion 2(t)-Villag~oncept o~Villages recorded in revenue records--l'ower 
of declaring village with State Government-Whether section 2(t) is violative 
of Art 243(g)-Held, No-Constitution equates Governor with State Govern-
ment-Notification issued by Government or a general or special order issued 
A 
B 
c 
by State Government-Constitutionally both are acts of Governot-Notifica-
D 
tions dated 9-5-1994 and 4-8-1994-Legality of. 
Constitution of India-Art.243(b )-U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947-Sec-
tion 2(g)-Gram Sabha-Definition-Whether definition given in section 2(g) 
is ultra vires provisions of Constitution-Held, No. 
U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947-Section 3--Establishment of a gram 
sabha for a group of village~Whether results in loss of identity of village with 
smaller population-Held, No. 
E 
Constitution of India-Article 243(e)-U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 
1947-Section 2( 11) r/w s 11-F-Panchayat area-carving out panchayat area 
F 
on basis of population-Whether provisions of section 2(11).r/w s 11-F are 
ultra vires Art. 243(e)-Held, N~Art 243(e) does not require that panchayat 
should be constituted on basis of territorial area alone. 
Constitution of India-Articles 243-D, 243-K-Elet:toral matters-Bar G 
on interference by court~Validity of d~limitation of panchayat area or of 
initial area and allotment of seats to constituencieS-Challenged-Whether 
court could have entertained such challenge-Held, No-Even this challenge 
could not have been entertained after issue of election notification. 
Constitution of India-Articles 243(g), 154( I) and 163-U.P. H 
1015 
1016 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1995] 2 S.C.Ri 
A 
Panchayat Raj Act, 1947-Section 96-A-Delegation of power under the 
Act-Wlzether Sec. 96-A is ultra vires Art.243(g)Held, No. 
Constitution of lndia-A1t. l4-U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947-Sections 
3 and 11-F-Detennination of Panchayat areas and gram sabhas-Obligat01y 
on State Government to hear objection before panchayat areas are 
B finalised-Cliange in areas of local bodies results in civil co!isequenceS-Post 
decisional hearing-Sufficient compliance in urgent matters. 
U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947-Nyaya Panchayats-Organisation 
of-Act making provision for-Wliether ultra vires the Constitution-Held, 
C 
No. 
On coming into force on 24.4.1993 of the Constitution (Seventy-Third 
Amendment) Act, 1992, which gives effect to one of the Directive Principles 
of State Policy, viz., Article 40 of the Constitution of India whereby the 
State is directed to organise village pancha)'ats as units of self-government, 
D 
the States were required by the Centre to take steps to organise village 
panchayats on the lines of the said Constitutional Amendment by making 
a law or amending the existing law suitably. The Uttar Pradesh State 
Legislature amended the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 by enacting the U.P. 
Panchayat Raj (Amendment) Act, 1994. As per the provisions of the Act, 
several Government instructions and notifications were issued and rules 
E 
F 
G 
. were framed with a view to hold elections to the panchayats. The declara-
tion of the gram panchayat areas u/s H-F and the establishment of the 
gram sabhas u/s 3 were made. The elections to the new panchayats were 
then notified. In pursuance of this notification the election process was to 
commence on 29.9.1994. 
The respondents fil~d writ petitions in the Allahabad High Court 
alleging that the Government orders were being violated in the process of 
re-organization and delimitation of the constituencies. Writ petitioners 
also challenged the validity of the Constitutional Amendment as well as 
the vires of the Panchayat Raj Act. The State Government renotified the 
dates of election. 
The High Court held that the definitions of 'village' u/s 2(t), of 
'Gram Sabha' u/s 2(g), and of 'Panchayat Area' u/s 2(11) r/w s 11-F of the 
Act were ultra vires the respective definitions given in Articles 243(g), 
H 
243(b), and 243(e) r/w Article 243-C of the Constitution. The High Court 
J 
'r 
STATE v. P.S.K. SAMIT! 
1017 
further held that the village had to 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.