A.M. DHAVALE, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the parties and taken up for final disposal at admission stage.

2. The petitioner, a defeated candidate in the Sarpanch election, seeks following reliefs:

(a) Election of respondent No. 5 as Sarpanch of village Grampanchayat Fagane dated 11.10.2017 be quashed and set aside in view of his disqualification for five years dated 03.11.2014.

(b) The petitioner be declared as elected Sarpanch for the remaining term.

(c) Enquiry be held against respondent No. 3 in respect of illegal and arbitrary order of refusing the to disqualify respondent No. 5.

(d) Respondent No. 5 be restrained from enjoying any benefits of the post of Sarpanch including salary, allowance and remuneration.

3. Shri Mukul Kulkarni, the learned counsel for the petitioner argued that, in the year 2013 respondent No. 5 had contested election for membership of Zilla Parishad, Dhule. The Election Commissioner (R-2) through the Collector, Dhule, by order dated 03.11.2014 disqualified him and banned him for five years from contesting election on account of not submitting or concealing election expenses to the Election Commission. Respondent No. 5 by concealing this fact submitted his nomination on 22.09.2017 for the post of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Fagane (R-4). The petitioner was also contesting the said election. Another candidate raised objection before the Election Officer (R-3) and brought this fact to his notice. Respondent No. 3 took a stand that the said order was applicable only for elections of Zilla parishad and Panchayat Samittee and rejected the objection. On 07.10.2017, respondent No. 5 was declared as elected Sarpanch. The present petitioner had secured votes next to him. Ld. counsel Shri. Kulkarni argued that, as per Section 13 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1958 disqualification under any law would make respondent No. 5 ineligible from contesting the election of Sarpanch. The interpretation by respondent No. 3 is not correct and legal. He relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in a case of K. Venkatachalam vs. A. Swamickan, (1999) 4 SCC 526 and Vidyadhar Mathane vs. State of Maharashtra, (2004) 3 Mah. L.J. 328.

4. Per contra, Mr. V.D. Sapkal, learned counsel for respondent No. 5 supported the impugned order of respondent No. 3. He argued that, the disqualification by the Collector in connection with membership of Zilla Parishad will not apply to the elections of Sarpanch. He relied on the judgment of this Court in a case of Sadasheo Barapatre vs. Hemaji Bakde, AIR 1958 Bom. 507.

5. From the arguments advanced, the question for our consideration is, whether the disqualification order passed at the time of election of membership of Zilla Parishad would make him disqualified for the election of Sarpanch of Grampanchayat and whether the petitioner is entitled for the consequential reliefs as claimed; (a) his own election as a Sarpanch and (b) restraining respondent No. 5 from enjoying any benefits of his post.

6. The eligibility for submitting the application for the post of Sarpanch as per the Maharashtra Government Gazette, Part 4 September 1, 2017 in Marathi, is as follows:

“HINDI”

7. The material words are that the candidate should not be disqualified under this Act or under any other Act in force.

8. The provisions of Section 15 of the Zilla Parishad Act reads as under:

S. 15. Persons qualified to be elected:-

Every person (who is not less than twenty-one years of age on the last date fixed for making nominations for every general election or bye election and) whose name is in the list of voters of any electoral division in a District, shall, unless disqualified under this Act or under any other law for the time being in force, be qualified to be elected, and every person (who is not of twenty-one years of age as aforesaid and) whose name is not such list shall not be qualified to be elected from any electoral divisions of that District.

9. The order