JUDGMENT P.K. Musahary, J. 1. The selection/election of Respondents No. 5 and 6 as Chairman and Secretary of Chedema Village Council for the term 2011-2016 is under challenge in this writ petition. The main ground for challenge is that Respondent No. 7, a woman representative has no right to vote in the selection/election of Chairman and/or Secretary of the Village Council, she being not a member of the Village Council choosen by villagers or clan members in accordance with the prevailing customary practices and usages and her name was not approved by the State Govt. 2. The short facts relevant for adjudication of this case are that with the expiry of tenure of village councils for 2006-2010, the State Govt. directed all the villagers in the State of Nagland to select/elect the new term of Village Council Members (VCMs) for the tenure 2011-2016. 3. In pursuance of the direction of the Govt. a meeting was organized/convened at Council Hall, Chedema Village on 1.2.2011 under the Chairmanship of the Head Gaon Burah for the election of village council for the tenure 2011-2016. The said meeting was attended by Gaon Burahs (G. Bs in short), Khel representatives, clan representatives and senior citizens of Chedema Village and each clan elected one member to represent the clan by adopting unanimous resolution in the said meeting held on 1.2.2011. In the said meeting it was also decided that woman representatives and societies would have no voting right in the village council matters. In the said meeting Mr. Sabeituo Usou and Mhasibeituo Thevuo were selected unanimously as Chairman and Secretary respectively by the VCMs. Accordingly the Head G.B of Chedema Village submitted a list of Chairman, Secretary and six VCMs vide letter dated 1.2.2011 addressed to the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima, for obtaining approval from the Govt. While the approval was pending some VCMs along with Respondents No. 5 and 6 made complaint that the entire selection/election of Chairman and Secretary was done behind their back. They demanded inclusion of women representatives in the Village Council. The Petitioners came to know about such complaints when they enquired about the approval of the Government. Having come to know about the same the Petitioners submitted representation dated 28.2.2011 apprising the Respondent No. 4 that under the existing Act/Law, women and society members have no right of voting. On the other hand, the Respondent Nos. The Petitioners came to know about such complaints when they enquired about the approval of the Government. Having come to know about the same the Petitioners submitted representation dated 28.2.2011 apprising the Respondent No. 4 that under the existing Act/Law, women and society members have no right of voting. On the other hand, the Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 along with some opponent VCMs demanded re-election of the Chairman and Secretary of the Village Council. 4. The Respondent-Deputy Commissioner by letter dated 7.3.2011 issued a direction to the head G.B. of Chedema Village to conduct election of Chairman of Village Council at the earliest. In the said letter, it was clearly directed that except VCMs and GBs who are ex-officio members, no representative from societies/NGOs would be allowed to vote for the Village Council Chairman election. By another letter dated 27.4.2011 the Respondent-Deputy Commissioner directed the Head G.B of Chedema Village to ensure that VCMs and G. Bs remain present on 4.5.2011 at 11 am in the office chamber of SDO(S)without fail. A meeting was accordingly held on 4.5.2011 in SDO's chamber. The meeting was attended by EAC(Sadar), SDO(Sadar), Political Assistant to Deputy Commissioner, Kohima and Head GB. The EAC read out the list of names furnished by the Head G.B. of Chedema Village which included a woman representative nominated by the Chedema Village Woman Society as VCM in the Chedema Village. 5. A question has been raised whether woman representative had ever voted in the previous election. Most of the members present answered in the affirmative. Example was cited that in 1992 when there was a tie during the election of Chairman, a woman representative cast vote to break the tie and thereafter the trend followed. It was decided in the meeting that since the woman members have been voting in the election of VCM since 1992, the issue cannot be truncated for the present election. However, it was observed that after the present election if the village council feels that the voting right of the woman should be curtailed or discontinued, it may pass resolution to resolve the issue. Thereafter election/selection of Chairman and Secretary proceeded. 7(seven) VCMs cast their vote while 6(six) of them abstained from voting. The Respondents No. 5 and 6, thus came to be elected/selected as Chairman and Secretary respectively of Chedema Village Council. Thereafter election/selection of Chairman and Secretary proceeded. 7(seven) VCMs cast their vote while 6(six) of them abstained from voting. The Respondents No. 5 and 6, thus came to be elected/selected as Chairman and Secretary respectively of Chedema Village Council. The Respondent "Deputy Commissioner vide its letter dated 20.5.2011 informed the Chairman of the Chedema Village Council that the newly election Chairman, Secretary and VCMs may start functioning until further orders from the Govt. The aforesaid list of newly elected chairman, Secretary and VCM as constituted in the meeting held on 4.5.2011 was forwarded to the Govt. for approval. The approval is still awaited. At this stage, the Petitioners have approached this Court to quash and set aside the - i. Impugned Minutes dated 4.5.11 selecting the Respondent No. 5 and 6 as Chairman and Secretary of the Chedema Village Council respectively by allowing the Respondent No. 7 to cast her vote and that too in violation of the provisions of the Article 371A of the Constitution of India, provisions of Nagaland Village Council Act, 1978, Letters dated 7.3.11 and 27.4.11(ANNEXURE-H). ii. Impugned Letter dated 20.5.11 allowing the Respondent No. 5 and 6 to start functioning as Village Council as Chairman and Secretary (ANNEXURE-I). 6. The basic argument advanced for the Petitioners is that Article 371A of the Constitution of India provides special provisions with respect to the State of Nagaland, especially providing safeguards to religious or social practices of the Nagas customary law and procedure. Under the Nagaland Village Council Act, 1978 (VC Act in short), a Village Council constituted under the law in force from time to time should administer justice within the village limit in accordance with prevailing customary practices and usages as accepted by the canons of justice established and the law in this respect as enforced from time to time. The V.C. Act provides no reservation for woman to represent as a woman to the Village Council and as such no woman representative from the NGOs or societies can claim reservation in the Village Council. It has been argued that by way of allowing Respondent No. 7, a member of Chedema Woman Society, the Respondent authorities have acted against the provisions under Article 371A and Section 4 of the Nagaland Village and Area Councils Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to 1978 Act only). It has been argued that by way of allowing Respondent No. 7, a member of Chedema Woman Society, the Respondent authorities have acted against the provisions under Article 371A and Section 4 of the Nagaland Village and Area Councils Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to 1978 Act only). The election/selection of Respondents No. 5 and 6 as Chairman and Secretary of the VC is illegal and unauthorized and such illegally constituted Village Council should not be approved by the Govt. The Respondent-Govt. should, rather, approve the committee constituted by the Petitioners in the meeting held on 1.2.2011 selecting/electing the Petitioners No. 1 and 3 as Chairman and Secretary of the Village Council inasmuch as it was so constituted without casting of vote by any woman representative from society or NGO. 7. Mr. Lima Wapang, learned Counsel representing private Respondents No. 5,6 and 7 strongly countered the above submissions and contended that it is totally mis-conceived and unfounded that as per Naga customary practices and usages woman folks do not have the right to participate in the day-to-day functioning of the village or Village Council. He further contended that Article 371A of the Constitution of India lays down the special provision that no act of parliament in respect of Naga customary law and procedure shall apply to the State of Nagaland unless the State Legislative Assembly by resolution so decides. According to him, in the year 1992 during election/selection of Chairman of Chedema Village a tie was broken by allowing woman representative to cast votes and it continued till the last selection/election of Village Council Chairman and Secretary held in the year 2010. It has been followed as a common practice without any objection to such practice from any corner and, therefore, the election/selection of Respondents No. 5 and 6 by allowing the Respondent No. 7 to cast her vote cannot be termed as illegal or unauthorized. 8. Mr. N M Jamir, learned Govt. Advocate supporting the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the private Respondents submits that there is no illegality or irregularity in allowing representation of Woman members to the Village Council inasmuch as there is no bar under Article371A of the Constitution of India and the provisions under 1978 Act. It has been contended that the act of allowing woman representative in the Village Council is in conformity with the Naga customary laws, usages and practices. It has been contended that the act of allowing woman representative in the Village Council is in conformity with the Naga customary laws, usages and practices. Moreover, according to him, in a democratic society it is unthinkable that Women in the Naga Society should be deprived of right of representation to the Village Council and therefore no fault could be found in the selection/election of Respondents No. 5 and 6. 9. The correctness of the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the Respondents are subject to examination and verification of the relevant provision under Article 371A and Section 4of the 1978 Act. The relevant part of the Article 371A requires reproduction for ready reference: 371A. Special provision with respect to the State of Nagaland,-(1) Not with standing anything in this Constitution,- (a) no Act of parliament in respect of (i) religious or social practices of the Nagas, (ii) Naga customary law and procedure, (iii) administration of civil and criminal justice Involving decisions according to Naga customary law, (iv) Ownership and transfer of land and its resources, shall apply to the State of Nagaland unless the Legislative Assembly of Nagaland by a resolution so decides: .... 10. This provision has been made to preserve the identity of Naga People by allowing them to live with their distinct religious, social practice, customs, tradition etc. They have been given opportunity to administer civil and criminal justice as per their customary law. Article 371A is silent about the share of participation of Naga men and women in the local administration. There is no mention about reservation for Naga Woman representative in the local administration. In my considered view Article 371A has no role to pay or application in the matter of providing reservation for woman representative in the Village Council or local body. This provision is for a mighty and lofty purpose/aim to preserve the distinct identity of Naga people for which it has been made incumbent upon the parliament to have the approval of the Nagaland State Legislature before any Act is implemented or enforced in the State of Nagaland. The parliament would not have any say in the matter of providing reservation for woman in the local body like Village Council. It is the State Government which is required to enact law or rules for such purpose. 11. The parliament would not have any say in the matter of providing reservation for woman in the local body like Village Council. It is the State Government which is required to enact law or rules for such purpose. 11. The 1978 Act provides constitution of Village & Area Council in Nagaland and Regulation of their duties and functions and for matters connected therewith. Under Section 3 of the said Act, every recognized village shall have a Village Council. Under the said Act village means and includes area recognized as village as such by the Government of Nagaland. An area in order to be a Village under this Act shall have to fulfill two conditions. The present case does not involve the question of recognition of village inasmuch as of the villages are admittedly Government recognized villages. The question involved is regarding constitution of village council Under Section4 of the 1978 Act. The pertinent question is whether there should be woman representation or reservation for woman in the Village Council. In order to examine this question Section 4 is quoted hereunder: 4. A Village Council shall consist of members, chosen by villagers in accordance with the prevailing customary practices and usages, the same being approved by the State Government, provided that hereditary village Chiefs GBs and Angs shall be Ex-officio Members of such Council and shall have voting right. 12. Section 4 does not provide for selection/election or nomination of members from the NGOs or societies. Admittedly, Respondent No. 7 is a woman representative from Chedema Village Woman Society. Such woman representative from a woman society or any other society, even including the NGO cannot be a Village Council Member as per provision Under Section 4. The village chiefs, G. Bs and Angs only shall be ex-officio members of the Village Council with voting right. The purpose behind incorporating Section 4 is that each clan residing within a particular village council area should have a representative to the Village Council to run the administration of Village Council. No other organization or society has been provided with any right to represent in the Village Council. Members of each clan choose their own representative as VCM as per prevailing customary practices and usages. No other organization or society has been provided with any right to represent in the Village Council. Members of each clan choose their own representative as VCM as per prevailing customary practices and usages. The Head G.B on receipt of list of selected members from the respective clans submits a list if VCMs to the Deputy Commissioner concerned who in his turn forwards the same to the Government for approval. After approval is received from the Govt. the Village Council will select/elect the Chairman and Secretary from amongst the VCMs. The Village Council will also select/appoint its Secretary from amongst the VCMs approved by the Govt. or from outside the V.C members. In this respect provisions Under Sections 7 & 8 of the 1978 Act may be referred to and quoted for ready reference.: 7 (1) The Village Council will choose a member as Chairman of the Council. (2) During the absence of the Chairman from any sitting of the Village Council a member of the Council nominated by the Chairman shall act as Chairman. 8. Secretary: The Village Council may select and appoint a Secretary who may or may not be a member of the Council. If the Secretary is not a member of the Council, he shall have no voting rights. 13. These provisions make it clear that except the members selected by the respective clans and the ex-officio members like the Village Chiefs, G. Bs. and Angs no other members have the voting right to elect/select the Chairman and Secretary of the Village Council. It is noticed that in the present case the list of members as prepared by the Petitioners in the meeting held on 1.2.2011 was pending approval of the Govt. At that stage the other members and the opponents held a meeting on 4.5.2011 attended by VCM and G.B.s in the office chamber of the SDO for selection of Chairman and Secretary. Such meeting for selection of Chairman and Secretary before approval of the list of the VCM, is not contemplated under the 1978 Rules. Such meeting, as per provision Under Section 7 & 8, could be convened after the list of the Village Council Members is approved by the Govt. From the pleadings of the parties, it is found indisputable that the meeting was held before the Govt. Such meeting, as per provision Under Section 7 & 8, could be convened after the list of the Village Council Members is approved by the Govt. From the pleadings of the parties, it is found indisputable that the meeting was held before the Govt. approved list of the Village Council Members sent by the Chief GB through the Respondent-Deputy Commissioner. The procedure adopted by the Respondent-authorities as well as the private Respondent is completely in violation of Section 7 and 8 of the 1978 Act. The Deputy Commissioner has exceeded his power in allowing opponent group to hold a meeting before approval was received from the Govt. and in allowing selection/election of Chairman and Secretary of the Village Council dehors the law. 14. Moreover, as discussed earlier, the selection of Respondents No. 5 and 6 as Chairman and Secretary of the Village Council was made allowing the Respondent No. 7 to cast vote although she is not entitled to exercise the right to vote in the selection/election of Chairman and Secretary of the Village Council. The procedure adopted in election/selection of Chairman and Secretary of the Village Council is vitiated and the same, in my considered view, cannot be allowed to sustain and for the same reason the Respondents No. 5 and 6 cannot be allowed to function as Chairman and Secretary of the Village Council. 15. The Respondents, in their effort to justify the act of allowing a woman representative from the society to cast vote in the election of Chairman and Secretary of the Village Council bank on an instance of breaking tie in the year 1992 when there arose a tie in the election of Chairman of Chedema Village Council. Such instance cannot be followed as a rule or accepted as a precedent unless it is backed by any law or rule or it is shown that in the entire State of Nagaland woman representatives from some societies have been allowed to participate as ex-officio members of the Village Council with right to vote. 16. The procedure adopted and the action taken by the Respondents in selecting the Respondents No. 5 and 6 is clearly beyond the procedure laid down Under Section 4, 7 and 8 of 1978 Act inasmuch as no amendment has been brought to the aforesaid Act allowing selection/election of members from the societies or NGS to send representation to the Village Council. The Act must provide that such member of the society or NGO should get the right of representation in the Village Council as has been provided clearly in the case of G. Bs and Angs who have been accepted as ex-officio members of the Village Council with voting rights. So far the present Act has provided no such representation from the societies and as such the action of the Respondents cannot be sustained as valid and authorized. The court is to interpret the present law and examinine the legality and validity of the impugned action of the Respondents and it cannot import something which is not provided in the statute. If the Respondents sincerely desire to give due representation of woman in the Village Council it could be done only through befitting amendment to the existing 1978 Act. It is the function of the State Legislature but the initiative must be taken by the Respondent-authorities. For this there should be a political will of the legislators and the Govt. Till such time comes, the court cannot allow the Respondents to give right of representation to woman vis-a-vis right to vote in the Village Council except in accordance with the existing law and procedure. I find that the Petitioners have been able to make out a case for interference with the impugned action of the Respondent-authorities. The impugned minutes dated 4.5.2011 (Annexure-H) as well as the impugned letter/order dated 20.5.2011 (Annexure-"I") stand set aside and quashed. The Respondent Authorities, particularly Respondent No. 3 is directed to approve the list of VCMs as submitted by the Petitioners and forwarded by the Respondent-Deputy Commissioner forthwith within a period of 15(fifteen) days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order in accordance with law. Thereafter the election/selection of Chairman and Secretary of the Village Council shall be made from amongst the VCMs approved by the Government as per provision under Sections 7 and 8 of the 1978 Act. 17. Accordingly this petition stands allowed. No costs. Petition allowed