A.S. Chandurkar, J.

1. Since similar issues arise in all these writ petitions, same are being decided by this common judgment.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with consent of learned counsel for the parties.

2. The issue that arises for consideration is whether an order of disqualification under provisions of Section-14B(1) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 (for short the said Act) can be passed without affording any opportunity to the person sought to be disqualified on account of failure to lodge an account of election expenses.

The facts leading to the present proceedings are that after general elections to the Grampanchayat were held in the year 2012, the petitioners were required to submit an account of election expenses in terms of provisions of Section-14B of the said Act. On 09/08/2013, the Collector passed an order holding the petitioners disqualified under provisions of Section 14B(1) of the said Act on the ground that the petitioners had failed to submit an account of election expenses. Being aggrieved, the petitioners filed appeals before the Divisional Commissioner raising a plea that they were never heard before the impugned order of disqualification came to be passed. The Divisional Commissioner dismissed the appeals holding that there was failure on the part of the petitioners to submit an account of election expenses and hence their disqualification was justified.

3. Shri P.A. Kadu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners were never heard before they were disqualified on account of failure to lodge an account of election expenses. He relied upon provisions of Section-16(2) of the said Act to urge that unless reasonable opportunity of being heard is given, no order of disqualification could be passed. He submitted that this ground was specifically raised before the appellate authority but same was not duly considered. He therefore submitted that in absence of any opportunity of hearing, the petitioners were precluded from putting forth their cases before the Collector.

4. Smt. Bharti Maldhure, Shri S.M. Bhagade and Shri C.N. Adgokar, learned Assistant Government Pleaders appearing for respondent Nos. 1,2 and 4 in respective writ petitions supported the impugned order. According to them as there was failure on the part of the petitioners in submitting the election expenses, their disqualification was legally justified. It was submitted that the act of failing to submit election expenses resulted in their consequent disqualification. Shri A.S. Agrawal learned counsel for respondent No. 3 in all the petitions also supported the impugned order.

5. I have carefully considered the submissions as urged. The provisions of Section-14B of the said Act under which the petitioners have been disqualified read thus :

14B. Disqualification by State Election Commission - (1) If the State Election Commission is satisfied that a person,

(a) has failed to lodge an account of election expenses within the time and in the manner required by the State Election Commission, and

(b) has no good reason or justification for such failure, the State Election Commission may, by an order published in the Official Gazette, declare him to be disqualified and such person shall be disqualified for being a member of panchayat or for contesting an election for being a member for a period of five years from the date of this order.

(2) The State Election Commission may, for reasons to be recorded, remove any disqualification under subsection (1) or reduce the period of any such disqualification.

6. Perusal of aforesaid provisions indicates that it is only after the State Election Commission is satisfied that there had been failure to lodge an account of election expenses within the prescribed time and in the manner prescribed coupled with the fact that there is no good reason or justification for such failure, then an order of disqualification could be passed. A plain reading of af