Heard.

2. Rule. With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal at admission stage.

3. Order impugned in this petition is one passed by the Additional Collector, Latur on 19-1-2010. Additional Collector, Latur in exercise of powers conferred under section 7 r/w. section 76 of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act has declared the petitioner. Sarpanch of the Village Panchayat, Waigaon, as having incurred disqualification and has further ordered that the post of Sarpanch has fallen vacant on account of disqualification incurred by the Sarpanch and further that the occupant of the post i.e. the petitioner herein is disqualified to hold the office of Sarpanch for further period. Petitioner herein is elected Sarpanch of Village Panchayat Waigaon and is occupying the office of Sarpanch since the date of his election by the members of the Village Panchayat. Application is stated to have been received by the Additional Collector on 7-7-2009 making grievance in respect of failure to hold the mandatory meetings of the Village Panchayat which in itself is disqualification for holding the office of Sarpanch as prescribed under section 7 of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act. The Collector was urged to initiate action for holding the petitioner disqualified to occupy the office of Sarpanch on account of failure to hold the mandatory meetings of Village Panchayat. Order passed by the Additional Collector discloses that on receipt of an application dt.7-7-2009, enquiry into the matter was directed at the hands of Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Udgir. Petitioner herein was issued notice in respect of the allegations levelled against her and was called upon to tender her reply. After considering the report of enquiry conducted by the Block Development Officer as well as on consideration of the reply tendered by the petitioner, the Additional Collector reached conclusion that the petitioner has failed to hold the required number of meetings as prescribed by section 7 of the act and as such, has incurred disqualification and is further not entitled to continue to occupy the office of Sarpanch.

4. I have perused the impugned order passed by the Collector. The very first paragraph of the order makes a reference to the application received by the Collector on 7-7- 2009. The order also records that in pursuance to receipt of the application, the Block Development Officer was directed to hold enquiry and the report of enquiry was received on 31-8-2009. While passing the order, the Additional Collector has referred to the application stated to have been received by on 29-6-2009 from one Dhondiba and other members of the Village Panchayat and the said application is stated to have been allowed. Petitioner has made a grievance that she has not been served with proper notice of enquiry nor has she received the copy of the complaint mentioned in the impugned order. On perusal of the report of enquiry conducted by the Block Development Officer, it transpires that the application received by the Collector on 29-6-2009 appears to have been transmitted to the Block Development Officer for conducting enquiry. Notice issued by the office of Additional Collector, Latur does not make any reference to the date of the application whereas, according to the petitioner, the copy of complaint annexed at Exh.D on page 47 dt.48-2009 has been transmitted to her alongwith the notice. Neither the complaint dt.7-7-2009 nor the complaint dt.29-6-2009 appears to have been transmitted to the petitioner. Notice issued by the Collector on 11-9-2009 also does not disclose the charges. Petitioner therefore was handicapped in tendering her reply as no charges were indicated by the Collector. The procedure adopted for holding enquiry appears to be improper. Affidavit-in-reply has been presented by the Additional Collector, Latue' who has decided the matter and has passed the impugned order. The answering respondent in terms has admitted that