IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Reddy K. Madhava, C.J. Daud S.M., J.
Shrikant Mallappa Ulegadi.... Petitioner.
Versus
Gram Panchayat at Mouje Kadgaon others .... Respondents.
Writ Petition No. 3920 of 1985, decided on 24-9-1985.
Advocates appeared :
Bhimrao N. Naik with V.B. Rajure, for petitioner.
V.A. Gangal, A.G.P., for respondent No. 5.
Resignation - Gram Panchayat - The court held that the petitioner's resignation from the Gram Panchayat took effect as per the provisions of section 29(1) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958, and that the petitioner could not dispute his resignation after voluntarily sending the notice of resignation. The resignation was deemed to have taken effect after the expiry of seven days from the date it was placed before the meeting of the Panchayat.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a member of the Gram Panchayat, sent a notice of resignation in the prescribed form. He later disputed the resignation, but the court held that he could not dispute it after voluntarily sending the notice.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's resignation took effect as per the provisions of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958, and that he could not dispute it after the expiry of seven days from the date it was placed before the meeting of the Panchayat.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner's resignation from the Gram Panchayat took effect as per the provisions of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958, and whether he could dispute his resignation after voluntarily sending the notice of resignation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted section 29(1) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958, and held that the resignation shall take effect after the expiry of seven days from the date it is placed before the meeting of the Panchayat if no dispute is raised regarding its genuineness.
Final Decision: The court rejected the writ petition, stating that the petitioner's resignation took effect as per the provisions of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958, and that he could not dispute it after the expiry of seven days from the date it was placed before the meeting of the Panchayat.
2. Though there was some attempt to put up before the Collector a case that this notice was not sent voluntarily and knowingly, the petitioner having admitted before the Collector that he had in fact sent a notice of resignation voluntarily, it is not now open to him to raise that question in these writ proceedings. Once it is held that he has sent the notice of resignation, the only question that requires to be considered is whether it amounts to resignation within the meaning of section 29(1) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958? Section 29(1) does not speak of notice of resignation. It only provides that any member who is elected may resign his office by writing under his hand addressed to the Sarpanch and Sarpanch may resign his office of member by writing under his hand addressed to the Chairman of the Panchayat Samiti. It further provides that the resignation shall be delivered in the manner prescribed. The manner prescribed under the aforesaid Rules is to send the resignation or the notice of resignation in Form I prescribed under Rule 3(2). The notice sent by the petitioner, of course, does not state that he has tendered the resignation, but recites “I hereby tender the notice of my resignation from the office of Gram Panchayat.” It must be noticed that the rules do not require a notice of resignation to be accompanies by any further letter of resignation. In other words, what is required of a person resigning is to sign the form and deliver it to the prescribed authority. Evidently where the person intends to resign forthwith will say I am tendering resignation and where one intends to resign from a particular date gives notice of resignation. In either case, the form is the same, the intention is to resign and the consequence is vacancy in the office. That requirement has been fulfilled and consequently petitioner shall be deemed to have resigned and cannot now dispute his resignation.
3. The petitioner having sent the notice of resignation voluntarily, disputed the same for the first time on 1st February, 1985 i.e. more than seven days after it was actually delivered to the Gram Panchayat. Sub-section (3) of section 29 provides that if any member or the Sarpanch whose resignation is placed before the meeting of the Panchayat, wants to dispute the genuineness of the resignation, he shall refer such dispute to the Collector within seven days from the date on which his resignation is placed before the meeting of the Panchayat. Sub-section 6(a) further provides that where there is no dispute regarding the genuineness, the resignation shall take effect after the expiry of seven days from the date on which it is placed before the meeting of Panchayat. The notice of resignation was received on 15-1-1985 and it was placed before the meeting on 28-1-1985. He did not raise any dispute before the Gram Panchayat. When no such dispute is raised as laid down under section 6, the resignation takes effect after the expiry of seven days from the date on which it is placed before the meeting of the Panchayat. The fact that he has raised the dispute on 1st February 1985, does not arrest the consequence laid down under section 6. Inasmuch as no dispute was raised regarding the genuineness of the notice of resignation, either before the Gram Panchayat or before the collector, the petitioner ceased to be a member of the Gram Panchayat. The resignation, therefore, took effect on the expiry of seven days. There is no merit in the writ petition. The petition is accordingly rejected.
Petition rejected.
-----
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.