The Delhi High Court criticised the Central government for not holding Cantonment Board elections since 2015 and for repeatedly using notifications to run boards without elected members. The Court warned that such actions may amount to a colourable exercise of power in a democratic system.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Monday strongly criticised the Central government for not conducting elections to Cantonment Boards across India for more than five years, and for repeatedly using special notifications to allow unelected officials to run these local bodies.
The case concerns the functioning of over 60 Cantonment Boards that handle civic administration in designated cantonment areas. The last elections for these boards took place in January 2015, and the elected members’ term ended in 2020, but no fresh polls have been held since then.
ALSO READ: Digital Arrest Scams Must Be Stopped: Supreme Court Directs CBI to Act Immediately
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela told the government that in a democracy, public bodies must be run by elected representatives. The Court observed that the actions of the government could even be seen as a misuse of legal powers.
The Bench remarked,
“We are living in a democratic society. We need to have democratically elected [Cantonment] boards.”
The judges noted that Section 12 of the Cantonments Act, 2006 clearly requires the formation of Cantonment Boards that include elected members.
However, instead of holding elections, the government has been repeatedly issuing notifications under Section 13 of the Act to change the composition of the boards.
The Court reminded the government that this power under Section 13 can only be used in two situations—during a military operation or when required for the administration of the cantonment area.
The Court further observed that when a Section 13 notification is issued, the board ends up functioning without any elected members.
It warned that the continued and repeated use of these notifications
“scuttles the democratic process by which the [Cantonment] Act has envisaged the Cantonment Board to function”.
The Bench said that this repeated practice raises serious doubts about whether the government’s actions are legally justified and in line with democratic principles.
Taking note of the seriousness of the issue, the Court issued notice to the Central government and the Director General Defence Estates (DGDE), asking them to explain how they can repeatedly use Section 13 notifications when the law clearly requires the boards to function through elected representatives.
The Bench has now decided to treat the matter as a public interest litigation (PIL) and fixed March 11 as the next date of hearing.
The petition was filed by Sandeep Tanwar and Yogesh Kumar, residents of the Delhi and Agra cantonments, who argued that the government has avoided holding elections for more than ten years by claiming to alter the structure of the Cantonment Boards.
They also said that there were long delays in appointing civilian nominees to various boards, making the administration even less representative.
Central Government Standing Counsel (CGSC) Satya Ranjan Swain, appearing for the Union government, submitted that elections have not been held because the Centre is working on creating uniformity between municipal laws and cantonment laws.
He added that the proposal to merge or transfer civil areas of some cantonments to nearby municipalities is under consideration, and discussions with State governments are ongoing.
According to him, this is the reason the government has been issuing notifications under Section 13 and that the entire process will require more time.
After hearing all sides, the Court asked the government to file a detailed reply explaining its position. Advocate Aman Bhalla represented the petitioners, and the plea was filed through advocates Sidharth Chopra, Navneet, and Hriday Gandhi.
Case Title:
Sandeep Tanwar & Anr v Union of India
Click Here to Read More Reports on Cantonment Board Elections
