On 10th September, the Allahabad High Court Division Bench observed that in a democratic set up, where the right to govern depends on the will of the people, the person who has lost the majority cannot be permitted to be hold office.
In the case of Tripti Rani v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors, the Court observed that Uttar Pradesh Kshetra Panchayat & Zilla Panchayat Act, 1961 provides for self-governance where the people of Gaon Sabha have been given the right to manage their own affairs and perform governmental function through a democratic process, under which they have been given the right to elect and remove the Pradhan by passing a motion of no confidence. Election and removal by the motion of no-confidence are two important aspects in a democratic set up for which the Act of 1961 has made ample provisions.
Justices Shashi Kant Gupta and Piyush Agarwal were of the opinion,
“Democracy is a system of government in which a country’s political leaders are chosen by the people in regular, free, and fair elections. In a democracy, people have a choice between different candidates and parties who want the power to govern. The people are sovereign. They are the highest authority and government is based on the will of the people. Elected representatives at the national and local levels must listen to the people and be responsive to their needs. Thus, the voters have right to elect their representatives and also criticize and replace them if they do not perform well.”
The Court firmly laid down, “In view of the above inherent political philosophy and principle, the provision for bringing a no confidence motion for removing the representatives, has been introduced in the present Act of 1961. The Will of people is supreme. It cannot be lightly interfered with. Under no circumstance can the will of the people be permitted to be frustrated.”
Lastly, the Court stated, “At a time, when the State is reeling from a monstrous pandemic, it is imperative that detailed modalities for holding statutory meetings of local bodies, including those for considering ‘No Confidence Motions’, are put in place and implemented. Accordingly, we direct the State Government to consider framing detailed Guidelines in this regard, expeditiously, if possible, within a period of three weeks from today. A copy of this order be sent to the Chief Secretary for its necessary compliance.”
