KSLU Corner™ New AIBE previous QP

Official language and local self-government

Constitutional Law II · Unit I · Topic 5 of 21 · 7 min read

Articles 343 to 351 in brief, then the Seventy-third and Seventy-fourth Amendments in detail: Gram Sabha, composition, reservation, State Election Commission, State Finance Commission and the Eleventh and Twelfth Schedules.

On this page
  1. 1. Official language: Articles 343 to 351
  2. 2. Why the 1992 Amendments were needed
  3. 3. Panchayats: Part IX
  4. 4. Municipalities: Part IXA
  5. 5. The leading cases
  6. 6. Problem
  7. How this is examined
Cases checked to exist. Read the judgment before quoting a holding.

Every case cited here has been checked to exist — the citation resolves and names the right parties. The propositions attributed to each case have not been verified line by line against the judgment. Case names link through to the full judgment: read it before quoting a holding in an examination answer, and never carry a proposition from notes into court on trust.

Spend your time on Parts IX and IXA. KSLU asks about the composition and powers of panchayats, and has set a problem on a municipal chairperson's post reserved for SC/ST women. The language provisions are needed only for a short note.

1. Official language: Articles 343 to 351

2. Why the 1992 Amendments were needed

Article 40 directed the State to organise village panchayats, but as a Directive Principle it was unenforceable. Local bodies were superseded for years, elections were not held, and their funds and functions depended on the State government. The Seventy-third Amendment (Part IX, Articles 243 to 243-O, and the Eleventh Schedule) and the Seventy-fourth Amendment (Part IXA, Articles 243P to 243ZG, and the Twelfth Schedule), both of 1992 and in force from 1993, gave local bodies constitutional status. Karnataka's law under Part IX is the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993.

3. Panchayats: Part IX

4. Municipalities: Part IXA

5. The leading cases

In K. Krishna Murthy v. Union of India, 2010 INSC 307, (2010) 7 SCC 202, a Constitution Bench upheld Articles 243D(4) and 243T(4), which reserve chairpersons' offices, and 243D(6) and 243T(6), which permit backward-class reservation. Reservation in local bodies is a distinct scheme, not governed by Articles 15(4) and 16(4). A chairperson's office is a single post, but reserving it does not offend equality because it rotates and so is not a permanent bar. The Court added that vertical reservation for SCs, STs and OBCs together should not ordinarily exceed 50 per cent, and that OBC reservation needs a rigorous inquiry into backwardness for political representation.

That last point became the “triple test” in Vikas Kishanrao Gawali v. State of Maharashtra, 2021 INSC 150, (2021) 6 SCC 73: a dedicated commission to study backwardness in the local body context, proportions specified on its findings, and a total within 50 per cent.

In Kishansing Tomar v. Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad, 2006 INSC 713, (2006) 8 SCC 352, the Court held that the State Election Commission must hold elections before the term ends, and cannot delay them on grounds such as pending delimitation. In Union of India v. Rakesh Kumar, 2010 INSC 32, (2010) 4 SCC 50, the Court upheld PESA's reservation of all chairpersons' posts in Scheduled Area panchayats for STs, as a measure to protect tribal self-government.

6. Problem

A State law reserves the office of chairman of a municipality for a woman belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes. A general-category candidate challenges it as violating Articles 14 and 16.

The challenge fails. Article 243T(4) itself provides that the offices of Chairpersons in municipalities shall be reserved for SCs, STs and women as the State legislature provides, and the women's reservation under 243T(3) extends to seats reserved for SCs and STs. Article 16 does not apply because a chairperson's office is an elective post, not public employment. In K. Krishna Murthy the Court upheld reservation of chairpersons' posts, even though each is a single post, because the reservation rotates among municipalities in successive terms. The candidate can succeed only if the State law fails the conditions in Part IXA (for example, no rotation, or reservations above 50 per cent without justification). Article 243ZG bars a challenge to the election itself except by an election petition.

How this is examined

A full question on the composition and powers of panchayats under the Seventy-third Amendment, or a short note on the Gram Sabha, State Election Commission or State Finance Commission. The municipal-chairperson problem has been set. For the language provisions, a short note on Article 343 or 348 is enough.

Now try the real questions: Constitutional Law II past question papers.