1. Heard learned Advocates for the respective parties.

2. Rule.

3. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith and the petition is taken up for final disposal.

4. The petitioner is elected as Member of Walwadi Gram Panchayat in the elections held in 2010. The term, as a Member, is to last for five years. The petitioner, thereafter, contested the elections for the position of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat and was elected as such.

5. Respondents 5 and 6, defeated candidates, lodged a complaint against the petitioner on 20.7.2012 alleging encroachment. It was numbered as Gram panchayat Dispute No.13 of 2012. The said complaint was heard by the Additional Collector. By an order dated 8.10.2012, the Additional Collector was pleased to hold that the complaint had no merits. It was concluded that the petitioner had not encroached upon the public premises or the Government land and had, therefore, not incurred a disqualification, as a Member of the Gram Panchayat, as contemplated under Section 14(1)(j3) of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958 ("the Act of 1958").

6. The order of rejection of the complaint was carried by respondents 5 and 6 to the Divisional Commissioner, Nasik by filing Appeal No.158 of 2012. The Additional Commissioner, under the delegated powers, has decided the said appeal on 12.3.2012, which was partly allowed. The order of the Additional Collector, Dhule was quashed and set aside and the matter / complaint was remitted back to the Additional Collector for being decided afresh.

7. The said complaint having been remitted back to the Additional Collector, was decided by the judgment dated 12.6.2013. The said dispute was renumbered as Gram Panchayat Dispute No.2 of 2013.

8. The Additional Collector while deciding the Gram Panchayat Dispute No.2 of 2013 had concluded that the Sub Divisional Officer had not recoded the statements of the localites in surrounding areas as regards the alleged encroachment. There was no measurement of the encroachment. The house, adjacent to the open space, belongs to Sau. Sindhubai, who was owner of the property and had a title to the said property. Sau. Sindhubai is mother-in-law of the petitioner. The panchanama was carried out and it has been reported that there is no encroachment / construction in that area.

9. The property bearing S.No.139/2A belonged to said Sau. Sindhubai in the Gram Panchayat Walwadi. Taking into consideration the explanation submitted and the panchanama carried out, it was concluded that there was no encroachment and as such by adducing reasons, the Additional Collector had rejected the complaint. He had also taken into account the ration card of said Sau. Sindhubai as well as ration card of the husband of the petitioner. The petitioner in her individual capacity does not have a ration card. It was also observed that the report submitted by the Sub Divisional Officer was without hearing either the petitioner or Sau. Sindhubai.

10. Being aggrieved by the said judgment of the Additional Collector, respondents 5 and 6 carried the matter in appeal before the Divisional Commissioner, being Gram Panchayat Appeal No.51 of 2013. Under delegated powers, the Additional Commissioner, Nasik decided the said matter, by its judgment and order dated 15.11.2013, which is impugned in this petition.

11. The said authority has drawn its conclusions which are from page No.26 of the petition paper book. Said conclusions can be summarized as follows:-

(a) The wall erected as a compound to cover the open space has been constructed by Shri Salunke.

(b) By the construction of the said compound wall, Shri Salunke has an intention of keeping the open space under his possession.

(c) By covering the open space with the compound wall, intention is to use the house and the open space for personal use (though it is not mentioned as to who desires to use it as a "personal property").

(d) The gate was installed in the said compound wall and the father of Shri Hemant Salun