SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(Bom) 415

D.G.KARNIK
Indubai Vedu Khairnar – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra & others – Respondent


JUDGMENT - KARNIK D.G., J.:---Heard.

2. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent.

3. The village panchayat Chaitane consists of 17 elected members. The petitioners was elected as a Sarpanch by the elected members some time in the year 2000. The respondent No. 21 was elected as Upsarpanch at the same time. Respondents 6 to 21 are the other members of the village panchayat out of them respondents 18 to 20 and the Upsarpanch i.e. respondent No. 21 supported the petitioner. The respondents 1 to 4 are the State and Government authorities are represented by learned Assistant Government Pleader who supports the judgment of the Additional Commissioner confirming the judgment of the Additional Collector.

4. Shri N.Y. Pagare, respondent No. 8 and 8 other members of the Gram Panchayat, Chaitane gave a notice to the Tahsildar of motion of no confidence against the Sarpanch and separate notice was also issued for a notice of no confidence against the Upsarpanch. In pursuance of the said notice, the Tahsildar convened a special meeting of the village panchayat for considering the motion of no confidence against the Sarpanch and Upsarpanch on 13th September, 2001. The notice of the meeting dated










Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top