When a Dalit Woman Sarpanch Overcame Prejudice with the Supreme Court’s Backing

The court expressed concern over the systemic bias against women elected from reserved seats, emphasizing that such discrimination undermines efforts toward gender equality and women’s empowerment in public office.

Geetha Sunil Pillai

New Delhi/Jalgaon – In a landmark case that highlights the challenges faced by women in leadership roles, particularly those from marginalized communities, Manisha Ravindra Panpatil, a Dalit woman sarpanch from Maharashtra, fought against deep-seated caste and gender biases.

Elected to the Vichkheda panchayat in Jalgaon district in February 2021 from a seat reserved for women, Manisha faced immediate backlash from some village residents who could not reconcile their biases with the reality of a female sarpanch. Instead of supporting her leadership, they sought her disqualification, unable to accept that a woman, especially a Dalit woman, would make decisions that affected their lives.

Accusations arose claiming she was encroaching on government land and living in a house with her mother-in-law. Manisha vehemently denied these allegations, stating that she lived in rented accommodation with her husband and children, while the house her detractors referred to was too dilapidated for habitation. Despite her defense, the District Collector disqualified her without a thorough investigation, an action that was later upheld by the Divisional Commissioner.

Undeterred, Manisha took her case to the Bombay High Court, where she faced further setbacks as her appeal was dismissed on August 3, 2023. This series of events highlighted not only the biases against her but also the systemic challenges that women in rural India encounter when they attempt to claim their rightful places in public offices.

The villagers were perhaps further unable to come to terms with the reality that a female sarpanch would make decisions on their behalf and they would have to abide by her directions.

Supreme Court

The case reached the Supreme Court. Recognizing the gravity of her situation, the apex court intervened, with Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan strongly supporting the woman sarpanch. They emphasized that the removal of an elected representative should not be taken lightly, particularly in cases involving women from rural areas who achieve such positions through significant struggle.

Reversing the Bombay High Court’s decision, the Supreme Court reinstated the sarpanch on September 27, allowing her to continue in her position until the end of her term. The bench said, “This is a classic case where the villagers could not reconcile with the fact that a woman had been elected as sarpanch and they had to abide by her decisions.”

The Court observed that the community’s attempts to undermine Manisha were grounded in prejudice, remarking that discrimination against women in public offices had become a troubling norm.

It stated, “This is especially concerning when the representative is a woman elected in the reservation quota, indicating a systemic pattern of prejudicial treatment that permeates all levels of administrative functioning.”

The Supreme Court ultimately overturned the Bombay High Court’s ruling, allowing Manisha to continue her term as sarpanch until its completion. This verdict not only reinstated her position but also sent a powerful message against the gender and caste biases prevalent in rural governance.

Courtesy: The Mooknayak

Note: This news is originally published on themooknayak.com and is used only for non-profit/non-commercial purposes, especially for human rights.