Allahabad High Court Quashes Inclusion of Barsana Dehat in Nagar Panchayat; Emphasizes Stakeholders’ Right to Be Heard

Keywords:

Allahabad High Court, Nagar Panchayat, Gram Panchayat, Barsana Dehat, objections, stakeholder rights, Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act, Article 243-Q, democratic rights.

The Allahabad High Court, in a landmark judgment delivered by a division bench of Justices Anjani Kumar Mishra and Jayant Banerji, quashed the inclusion of Gram Panchayat Barsana Dehat in the transitional area of Nagar Panchayat Barsana, citing the failure of the State Government to duly consider objections submitted by stakeholders within the statutory timeframe. The decision affirms the democratic and participatory rights of residents under the Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1916, and emphasizes the constitutional mandate for public consultation in such matters.

Background:

On September 15, 2022, the Governor of Uttar Pradesh issued a notification under Article 243-Q(2) of the Constitution, proposing the inclusion of Barsana Dehat in the transitional area of Nagar Panchayat Barsana. The notification invited objections or suggestions from stakeholders within seven days of its publication, as per Section 4(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act.

The residents of Barsana Dehat, an economically disadvantaged area dependent on state-sponsored welfare schemes, opposed this transition. The Gram Pradhan submitted an objection by post on September 19, 2022, which was delivered to the State Government the next day, as confirmed by postal tracking records. However, in October 2022, the State issued a final notification, including Barsana Dehat in the Nagar Panchayat, without addressing the objection. This prompted the Gram Pradhan to file a writ petition challenging the notification.

Court’s Analysis and Findings:

The High Court, while quashing the notification, underscored the following key points:

1. Mandatory Public Consultation:
   The court emphasized that Sections 3, 4, and 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act mandate wide and effective notice to ensure every resident of the affected area has the opportunity to voice objections or suggestions. Such provisions are essential to safeguard democratic rights and prevent arbitrary decisions affecting livelihoods.
2. Failure to Consider Objections:
   The State Government’s dismissal of the petitioner’s objection on the ground of delayed submission was deemed invalid. The court noted that the tracking report clearly showed the objection was received within the stipulated timeframe. Despite acknowledging this, the government failed to consider it and incorrectly categorized it with other objections.
3. Impact on Livelihoods:
   Barsana Dehat is home to economically vulnerable individuals whose access to state welfare programs is contingent on their village’s classification. The inclusion of Barsana Dehat in the Nagar Panchayat would deprive residents of Gram Panchayat-specific welfare schemes, significantly affecting their quality of life. The court observed that these civil consequences necessitate strict adherence to procedural safeguards.
4. Governor’s Role:
   The court reiterated that the Governor, under the Act, is obligated to give due consideration to all objections and suggestions received within the prescribed period before issuing a final notification. Failure to do so violates statutory requirements and undermines the rights of stakeholders.

Judgment:

The High Court quashed the notification, holding that the State Government’s failure to consider valid objections amounted to a breach of procedural and constitutional mandates. The court also emphasized the importance of respecting the rights of residents and ensuring that administrative actions do not unjustly disrupt lives.

Significance of the Judgment:

This decision is a strong assertion of the right to participatory governance enshrined in the Constitution of India. It reinforces the principle that stakeholders in affected areas must have their objections and concerns considered before administrative changes are implemented.

The ruling also highlights the civil consequences of reclassification, particularly for marginalized communities, and places accountability on the State to follow due process. For policymakers, this judgment serves as a reminder to uphold transparency and procedural fairness in governance.

Conclusion:

The Allahabad High Court’s verdict underscores the importance of respecting democratic principles in governance. By quashing the inclusion of Barsana Dehat in Nagar Panchayat Barsana, the court has upheld the rights of the residents to be heard and ensured that their welfare is not undermined by procedural lapses. This case sets a significant precedent for protecting stakeholder participation in administrative decisions.

Stay tuned for live updates on the rupee’s movement and real-time business news on Kanishk Social Media—your go-to source for comprehensive stock market and legal news.