Rule. This writ petition under Article 226 and Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune in Gram Panchayat Appeal/Kolhapur/185 of 2011.

2} That appeal was directed against the order passed by the Additional Collector, Kolhapur in dispute/complaint bearing No.8 of 2011 decided on 25th October 2011.

3} The Additional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune while allowing the appeal has held that the petitioner is disqualified under section 14(1)(j-3) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958 (for short “the Act”). This is a disqualification incurred on account of encroachment made upon government land or public property.

4} A complaint was made by the respondent No.1 that Gram Panchayat Padwalwadi is the Gram Panchayat in question. Its elections were notified and the complainant is a voter/elector for the said elections. That election was held on 27th June 2010. The petitioner contested the said election from Ward No.3 which was reserved for women (general). She was declared elected. Thereafter, the Gram Panchayat post of Sarpanch which was also reserved for this category was contested by the petitioner and she was elected unopposed.

5} The petitioner is disqualified because she is married to one Shivaji Atigre. He claims through a common ancestor Bapu Atigre who had two sons Shivaji and Pandurang. They are all residing together. Gat No.47 is a land belonging to government and is notified as “gairaan land”. There is a structure constructed by encroaching on this land and which is assessed and numbered 264 in the Gram Panchayat record. It is stated that in the assessment record the name of the owner in relation to this land is Maharashtra government whereas occupants are Shri.Shivaji Atigre and Sou.Kanchan Shivaji Atigre (petitioner). The taxes in relation to this house (house tax) have been paid by the petitioner. She has colluded with the Gram Panchayat officials and has falsely entered the name of her brother-in-law. In these circumstances, she is disqualified for being elected and for continuing as a Member of the Gram Panchayat. The petitioner, therefore, should be disqualified.

6} This application was filed on 4th February 2011 in which the petitioner filed a reply and denied each and every statement and allegation. She submitted that respondent No.1-complainant himself is a defaulter as he has not paid the taxes. Therefore, alleging that this is a vexatious and false complaint, she prayed for dismissal of the same.

7} After the parties filed a reply and documents relied upon, the matter was heard by the Additional Collector and has held that firstly, Property bearing No.264 has been inherited by the predecessors and family members of the petitioner. There was an encroachment thereon which was brought to the knowledge of the 1st respondent. That apart, it has been held that in so far as the assessment record shows that for the assessment year 2010-2011, the Property bearing No.264 was assessed in the name of Shivaji Bapu Atigre and the petitioner and their names were entered in the possession column whereas the name of Government of Maharashtra was shown in the ownership column. However, for the year 2010-2011 (latter part), the name in the possession column was changed to Pandurang Bapu Atigre. This change has occurred on account of Resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat.

8} Pertinently, he held that which family member of the petitioner has encroached upon government land, has not been clarified by production of the Encroachment Register by either Tahsildar or Gav Kamgar Talathi. However, there is a panchnama drawn by Circle Officer, Nigve, Talukar Karveer, which shows that this house property admeasuring 10 X 5 ft has a cement roof. It is a permanent cement construction and when this panchanama was prepared, Pandurang Atigre was present and his statement was recorded. He stated that this encroachment has been made by his father Ba