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

2016 Supreme(Bom) 520

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
R. M. SAVANT, J.
Shri Chagan Sadashiv Jadhav - Petitioners.
Versus
Smt. Manisha Ramnath Bhandare -Respondents.
WRIT PETITION NO. 12009, 12010, 12011 OF 2015
Decided On : 04-05-2016

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. P N Joshi a/w Mr. P B Rahade for the Petitioners in all the Petitions.
Mr. S K Shinde, i/by Ms. Sneha G Sanap for the Respondent
Mrs. V S Nimbalkar, AGP for the Respondent

Important Point—Essence of democracy is that persons who have lost confidence of majority have to go.

Headnote:Bombay Village Panchayat Meeting Rules 1958—Sections 35, Rule 7 and 17—No Confidence Meeting Rules 1975—Rule (2B)—Removal of Sarpanch and UpaSarpanch—Motion of No-Confidence—Sarpanch and UpaSarpanch are pivots around which village administration runs---Gram Panchayats are the symbols of local self government at village level and a situation where functioning of Gram Panchayat has virtually come to a standstill, cannot be allowed to continue---Essence of democracy is that persons who have lost confidence of majority have to go---Since there is substantial compliance in respect of service of notice on Respondent and since there is no substance in other grounds on which impugned order is based---Motion of No Confidence cannot be nullified on a technicality.

       Result—Writ Petitions allowed.

JUDGMENT :

1. Rule, with the consent of the Learned Counsel for the parties made returnable forthwith and heard.

2. The above Writ Petitions take exception to the identical orders dated 02/11/2015 passed by the Additional Collector, Nashik by which orders the Motion of No Confidence passed against the Respondent No.1 in the above Petitions (W.P. No.12009 of 2015 and W.P. No.12010 of 2015) in the meeting dated 05/09/2015 of the Gram Panchayat, Kasbe Sukene, Taluka Niphad, District Nashik was set aside.

3. Since the above Petitions involve common questions of law and fact, they are heard together. The facts giving rise to the above Petitions can in brief be stated thus :The Respondent No.1 to each of the above Petitions were elected as the members of the Gram Panchayat Kasbe Sukene, Tal. Niphad, Dist. Nashik. The elections were for the term 2012-2017. After the said elections, the Respondent No.1 in Writ Petition No.12009 of 2015 Smt. Manisha Ramnath Bhandare was elected as a Sarpanch; the Respondent No.1 in Writ Petition No.12011 Shri Kishor Kardak was elected as Upa Sarpanch. The said Respondents would be hereinafter referred to as the Sarpanch and UpaSarpanch.

The Respondent No.1 in Writ Petition No.12010 of 2015 Shri Somnath Pandurang Bhagwat continued to remain as a member of the said Gram Panchayat. The Petitioners herein who are also the members of the said Gram Panchayat made a request to the Tahsildar, Niphad on 01/09/2015 for requisitioning a meeting of the Gram Panchayat for passing a Motion of No Confidence against the Sarpanch and UpaSarpanch. After receipt of the said requisition, the Tahsildar, Niphad convened a special meeting of the Panchayat to be held on 05/09/2015 which meeting was called by the Tahsildar vide his notice dated 2/09/2015. The notice of the said meeting was served on the Respondent No.1 to each of the above Petitions as also the other members of the Gram Panchayat and a panchanama was drawn to the said effect that the Respondent No.1 to each of the above Petitions was served. The special meeting accordingly took place on 05/09/2015 and a Motion of No Confidence was passed against the Sarpanch and UpaSarpanch with majority of 14:0. The minutes were accordingly prepared by the Tahsildar and in terms of the rules applicable, it seems that the motion passed in the meeting was communicated to the authorities, as required to be communicated with the copies thereof. After passing of the said resolution the Respondent No.1 in each of the above Petitions filed a Dispute before the Additional Collector, Nashik. In so far as the Respondent No.1 Smt. Manisha Bhandare (Sarpanch) is concerned, her Dispute Application was numbered as 42 of 2015, in so far as the Respondent No.1 Shri Somnath Bhagwat is concerned, his Dispute Application was numbered as 45 of 2015 and in so far as the Respondent No.1 Shri Kishor Kardak (UpaSarpanch) is concerned, his Dispute Application was numbered as 43 of 2015. The said Dispute Application No.43 of 2015 was filed by Shri. Somnath Bhagwat challenging the Motion of No Confidence passed against the Sarpanch and UpaSarpanch. In the said Dispute Applications the principal contention raised was that the notice dated 02/09/2015 of the meeting was not served upon the Respondent No.1 and therefore the Respondent No.1 to each of the above Petitions could not attend the meeting and in view thereof they could not address the house prior to the Motion of No Confidence being taken up for consideration.

4. The said Dispute Applications were opposed to on behalf of the Petitioners to the above Petitions. The opposition was on the ground that the Petitioners were required to move the said resolution on account of the manner in which the Sarpanch and UpaSarpanch were functioning. That the said resolution was passed by a majority of 14:0. In so far as the service of notice is concerned, the Petitioners averred in their replies that the notices were served on the adult member available in the house

























































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
whatsapp-icon Back to top