T.V. Nalawade, J.

The petition is filed to challenge the order made by the Hon'ble Minister for Urban Development under Section 55B of the Maharashtra Municipal Council, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by which the present petitioner is disqualified from the post of both Vice-president and Municipal Councilor of Municipal Council, Osmanabad. By the same order, the petitioner is debarred from contesting the election to the said council for the period of next six years from the date of the order. Both sides are heard.

2. The petitioner was elected as Councilor in the aforesaid municipal council in the year 2006 for the term 2006-11. Respondent No. 5 who had started proceeding for disqualification had contested the election from the rival political party. On 16th June, 2006 the petitioner was elected to the post of Vice-president of the council.

3. Respondent No. 5 filed proceeding before the Collector, Osmanabad under Sections 44, 55A and 55B of the Act and he contended that by misusing his post as Councilor and Vice-president, the present petitioner had made illegal construction of his house bearing House No. 22/63 situated within the local limits of the Municipal Council, Osmanabad. The application was given on 07th January, 2011 and notice came to be issued on 22nd February, 2011 against the present petitioner. Prior to issuing show cause notice, the Collector collected the report from Town Planning Authority of Osmanabad and Chief Officer of Municipal Council, Osmanabad in respect of the allegations. The report was to the effect that construction was made over more area than the permission granted and the construction was made in the space which is required to be kept as set back as per the Town Planning, Development Rules. Copies of these reports were supplied to the present petitioner by the Collector and it was informed specifically that there was excess construction of 298.93 sq. meters and that was of aforesaid nature. Thus there was breach of the rules made for development, there was construction by using more F.S.I. than permissible and construction was made on the space which was required to be kept vacant as set back. The petitioner was asked to appear before the Collector for showing cause as to why action against him as provided under Section 44(1) (d) should not be taken. It needs to be mentioned that the provision of Section 44(1)(c) is applicable when there is misconduct of aforesaid nature from Councilor. In any case, the specific allegation against him and circumstances were informed in the show cause notice by the Collector.

4. The petitioner field reply to the aforesaid show cause notice. He contended that the construction permission was granted by the local body on 05th February, 2009 to his father – Shursenraje Nimbalkar and he admitted that he was holding the post of Vice-president of the Municipal Council, Osmanabad at the relevant time. But he denied that construction was made of more than permissible F.S.I. and it was made in set back space. He contended that occupancy certificate was also given in respect of the said construction. He denied that he misused the post and due to his influence, political influence, the authority had given construction permission and the occupancy certificate and the authority was not taking action to pull down the construction.

5. The present petitioner contended in the reply that his father was not depending on him and he had other sources of income. He also contended that for about one year prior to his death his father was living separate from him. He contended that the construction was made by his father and he had no concern with the said construction.

6. After filing the reply of aforesaid nature, the present petitioner rushed to the Hon'ble Minister for Urban Development and filed application on 21st May, 2011. He prayed for transfer of the matter pending before the Collector, Osmanabad to other District