Kohima: The Gauhati High Court has ruled in favour of the Nagaland Government in the 33 per cent women reservation issue in the Municipal and Town Councils and deferring the civic elections in the state indefinitely, while disagreeing with the views and conclusions recorded by the learned single judge earlier on the issue.
According to sources here today, in its judgment delivered on August 1, Justice Amitava Roy and Justice P K Musahary while exhaustively interpreting Article 371 A of the Constitution of India, rejected the views of the women association that the 74th amendment of the Constitution supersedes Article 371 A and accepted the supremacy of Article 371 A.
The Court also rejected the allegations that the resolutions passed by the Legislative Assembly were malafide and upheld the of the Assembly resolutions.
In its 33-page judgment, the Court observed that the rumblings with smouldering undertones generated by the provision for reservation incorporated by the Nagaland Municipal (First Amendment) Act, 2006 though manifested in a limited form of boycott of elections to the Municipal and Town Councils in 2008 in Mokokchung, which had to be called off as the process faced formidable opposition, gathered intensity as the representations subsequent to the Notification dated 14.3.2012 indicated.
The background of the consultative meetings in which strong views opposing reservation for women were expressed by a considerable section of the tribal community individually and collectively cannot also be lightly disregarded.
Apart from the grounds urged in these representations bearing on the Naga custom and the societal fabric as emphasized, reverberation of the passionate fervour accompanying the same is noticeable, the judgment said.
The Court observed that at no stage it had been either pleaded or had transpired that the state of Nagaland is averse to the civic bodies’ elections, rather after the enactment of the Act 2006 steps in terms of allotment and identification of wards for reservation, amongst others for women were taken.
In view of the resistance encountered by the state, the Cabinet had to take a decision to defer the same, it added. (UNI)