The Supreme Court raised concerns about the increasing tendency of bureaucratic harassment against female elected officials while providing relief to a woman Sarpanch in Chhattisgarh against her removal from office.

“It is disheartening that despite our nation's aspirations to become an economic powerhouse, these incidents of discrimination against women in governance continue unabated, bearing striking similarities across geographically distant regions. Such practices normalise regressive attitudes and must be met with serious introspection and reform,” observed the bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan.

The Supreme Court on November 14, 2024, granted relief to a woman, Sarpanch, who was ousted from her position due to a delay in the completion of construction work. In 2020, at the age of 27, she was elected by a big margin as the Sarpanch of Sajbahar Gram Panchayat. An order issued in 2023 under the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993, removed her from office. When the High Court refused to grant her relief, she approached the Supreme Court by way of a Special Leave Petition (SLP).

The Supreme Court determined that the Sarpanch was not responsible for the delay and that the actions taken against her were capricious and tyrannical.

Also Read: Supreme Court: Religious Conversion For Reservation Benefits Violates Social Ethos Of The Policy

"It is self-evident that construction projects require coordinated efforts from engineers, contractors, timely supply of materials, and are subject to the vagaries of weather etc. Holding the Sarpanch solely accountable for delays, without evidence of her failing in allocating work or performing a duty specific to her elected position, is totally atrocious," the Court observed in their order dictated in the open court on November 14.

The court also criticised the approach of the High Court in declining relief, citing the existence of an alternative by stating that the discretionary remedy under Article 226 must be exercised. The bench directed the Chief Secretary of Chhattisgarh to release the cost of Rs. 1 lakh to the Appellant within the stipulated period and hold an inquiry to find out the officers/officials responsible for her harassment.

Case Title: Sonam Lakra v. State Of Chhattisgarh & Ors., SLP(C) No. 7279/2024

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Manish Kumar Gupta, AOR Mr. Lave Kumar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Sharad Prakash Pandey, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Vikrant Singh Bais, D.A.G. Mr. Vinayak Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ravinder Kumar Yadav, AOR Mr. Kshitiz Aggarwal, Adv. Mr. Kritika Yadav, Adv.