The Supreme Court recently took strong exception to the gender discrimination faced be elected women representatives in India, particularly at Panchayat (village council) levels (Sonam Lakra v State of Chhattisgarh and ors).
The Court was dealing with a case where it found that the ouster of a woman Sarpanch (elected village head) marked yet another case where the administrative authorities and other Panchayat members colluded to exact a vendetta against a female sarpanch.
A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan recounted that the Court had earlier also flagged concern over pervasive patterns of unfair treatment that female Sarpanches face across various levels of administrative functioning.
"Such instances highlight a systemic issue of prejudice and discrimination ... Alarmingly, the removal of an elected female representative, especially in rural and remote areas, is frequently treated as a casual matter, wherein disregarding principles of natural justice and democratic processes is treated as a time ¬honored tradition. This entrenched bias is particularly disheartening and demands serious introspection and reform," the Court observed.
It further emphasised that a nation striving to be an economic powerhouse cannot allow such gender discrimination to continue.
"It is distressing to witness such incidents occurring consistently and being normalized, so much so that they bear striking similarities even in geographically distant regions. Administrative authorities, being custodians of actual powers and affluent enough, should lead by example, making efforts to promote women’s empowerment and support female-led initiatives in rural and remote areas. Instead of adopting regressive attitudes that discourage women in elected positions, they must foster an environment that encourages their participation and leadership in governance," the Court said.
The case before the Court concerned a 27-year-old woman who had won the local elections to become the Sarpanch of the Sajbahar Gram Panchayat. The Panchayat was later assigned several development works, including ten construction projects for roads.
The Sarpanch, however, was eventually blamed for delays in completing the construction work and removed from her post in January 2024. She challenged this turn of events. After the High Court refused to grant any relief, she approached the Supreme Court.
On November 14, the Supreme Court ordered her reinstatement and also awarded her 1 lakh has compensation for the harassment she had suffered.
It found that the female Sarphanch had been singled out and selectively blamed for construction delays, even though the responsibility to oversee the development project was shared by several Panchayat members.
"We are convinced that these proceedings (against the woman sarpanch) were initiated on a flimsy pretext, so as to remove the appellant from office under false and untenable grounds," the Court held.
It deeply concerns us that there is a recurring pattern of similar cases, where administrative authorities and village panchayat members collude to exact vendettas against female Sarpanches. Such instances highlight a systemic issue of prejudice and discrimination
In its judgment, the Court also criticised the tendency to treat elected representatives are "subordinate to bureaucrats" in order to compel them to comply with directives that may violate their autonomy.
"This misconceived and self styled supervisory power is asserted with an intention to equate elected representatives with public servants holding civil posts, completely disregarding the democratic legitimacy conferred by election," the Court lamented.
