SC slams gender bias in public office, reinstates Chattisgarh sarpanch

The court also directed the state government to pay ₹1 lakh to the sarpanch as compensation, adding that the state could recover the amount from the responsible officials once identified.

The Supreme Court on Thursday condemned the entrenched gender bias against women in public office, ordering the reinstatement of a young woman sarpanch in Chhattisgarh after she was removed from her position on grounds the court deemed unjustified and discriminatory.

“Instead of admiring her commitments or cooperating with her or extending a helping hand to support her village’s development, she has been wronged for absolutely uncalled-for and unjustified reasons,” stated a bench of justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan, setting aside the order that had removed her from office.

The court also directed the Chhattisgarh government to pay ₹1 lakh to the sarpanch as compensation for the hardship she endured, adding that the state could recover the amount from the responsible officials once identified.

Ordering an inquiry against officials who had caused her what the court called “unwarranted harassment”, the bench expressed strong disapproval over the actions taken against the 27-year-old sarpanch, who was removed on the grounds of alleged delays in local construction work — charges the court found to be without merit.

“This is a case bordering on high-handedness on the part of the authorities in removing an elected sarpanch, a young woman who chose to serve her village in a remote area of Chhattisgarh,” maintained the bench.

The court’s decision marks the second time in recent weeks that this bench has intervened to address alleged mistreatment of women elected officials. Just last month, the bench similarly reinstated a female sarpanch from Maharashtra’s Jalgaon district, who were disqualified on grounds the court found unsubstantiated. In that case, the bench made clear its view that systemic biases and discriminatory attitudes against women in governance continue to undermine efforts toward gender equality and the representation of women in public office.

The Supreme Court’s recent interventions signal a strong stance against gender-based discrimination in governance, particularly at the grassroots level, where women often face the toughest barriers.

In the present case, the bench highlighted not only the wrongful removal of Sonam Lakra but also, the flawed logic employed by the authorities in holding her responsible for delays in the village’s development projects.

Lakra, elected in 2020 to lead the Sajbahar Gram Panchayat, had been accused of failing to complete construction projects -- work that had been delayed due to logistical issues, including the timing of material supply and the involvement of contractors and engineers.

Addressing these circumstances, the bench underlined: “Construction work involves engineers, contractors, and timely supply of materials, besides vagaries of weather...how can a Sarpanch be held responsible for delays unless it is shown there was a delay in the allocation of work or some specific duty assigned to the elected body?”

The bench ultimately held that the proceedings against her were baseless and directed her immediate reinstatement.

It also took issue with the arbitrary issuance of directives to the sarpanch, expressing that the official orders appeared to lack technical understanding of the time frames involved in construction projects. Noting that such actions seemed aimed at deterring and discouraging the young woman from continuing in her role, the bench berated the tendency of local officials to demand compliance from elected representatives without just cause. “That is what you want… You want a sarpanch to go with a begging bowl before the babu… some clerk who has been promoted as CEO…,” the bench told the counsel appearing for the state government.

Concluding its order, the court directed the chief secretary of Chhattisgarh to conduct a thorough inquiry into the officials responsible for the sarpanch’s unwarranted removal, stating that the compensation ordered should be paid by the state within four weeks, with the option to recover it from those accountable. “The State shall be at liberty to recover the amount from such officers/officials in accordance with principles of natural justice,” it directed.

In its ruling in October, the same bench had underscored that women leaders, especially in rural areas, face deep-rooted prejudices and resistance from both private complainants and government officials. “The removal of an elected representative, especially a woman from a rural area, should not be taken lightly, as it disregards the efforts these women make to secure and retain such positions,” the bench had stated. It had also criticised the “mechanical and summary orders” passed by local authorities, describing them as indicative of “systemic prejudice” within the administrative framework.

It also observed at the time that women leaders in rural governance are often discouraged and undermined through arbitrary actions and false allegations, adding added that such actions jeopardise India’s progressive vision for gender parity and empowerment, a goal that can only be achieved when women are allowed to serve without fear of unjust treatment.