NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has emphasiSed that the removal of an elected public representative, particularly a woman from a rural background, should not be taken lightly.This statement came as the Court set aside an order for the removal of Manish Ravindra Panpatil, a woman sarpanch from Vichkheda village in Maharashtra.A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan termed the matter as a classic case where the residents of the village could not reconcile with the fact that a woman was elected to the office of the sarpanch.The Court noted, “This scenario is particularly concerning as our nation strives for gender parity and women’s empowerment across various sectors, including public offices. Instances like these at the grassroots level undermine the progress we aim to achieve.”The bench recogniSed the challenges faced by women who attain such public positions, stating, “The removal of an elected public representative should not be treated lightly, especially when it involves women from rural areas.”Panpatil was initially ordered to be removed after allegations surfaced that she was residing with her mother-in-law in a house built on government land. She denied these allegations, asserting that she lives separately with her husband and children in rented accommodation. However, the order for her removal was issued without proper verification of the facts and was based merely on “bald statements,” which were not substantiated by credible evidence.The Court noted that the Collector’s decision to disqualify Panpatil was confirmed by the divisional commissioner, and the High Court later dismissed her writ petition on technical grounds, effectively endorsing her removal. The bench criticized the villagers for attempting to oust Panpatil, suggesting that their efforts were supported by superficial actions taken by government authorities.The bench said, “These orders were passed without any serious fact-finding effort, raising concerns about the discriminatory behavior of the private respondents.”It expressed particular alarm over the casual approach adopted by government authorities in summarily removing an elected representative, especially a woman elected under a reservation quota, indicating a broader pattern of systemic bias in administrative processes.Given the absence of credible evidence to support the allegations of land encroachment, the Supreme Court concluded that Panpatil’s removal was disproportionate. The bench urged authorities to create a supportive environment for women in leadership roles, emphasizing the need for sensitivity and understanding.Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the Bombay High Court’s August 3, 2023, order and allowed Panpatil to continue her duties as sarpanch of the gram panchayat for the remainder of her term.
Source link
