JUDGMENT :

Rule. Heard finally with consent of counsel for the parties.

2. The challenge raised in this writ petition is to the order dated 14.09.2016 passed by the Additional Commissioner thereby upholding the disqualification of the petitioner on account of his failure to submit the statement of accounts as to the expenses incurred in contesting the elections to the Gram Panchayat. The initial order of disqualification has been passed by the Additional Collector under the provisions of Section 14 B of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 (for short, 'the said Act').

3. The facts in brief that are relevant to decide the challenges raised in the writ petition are that the elections to elect members of Gram Panchayat, Sarra, Tah.Tirora, District Gondia were held in July 2015. In those elections seven posts of members were to be filled in. The petitioner along with six other candidates were declared elected unopposed as members of the Gram Panchayat. After the results were so declared, the Additional Collector as per the provisions of Section 14B of the said Act called upon the elected members to submit the statement of account of election expenses within the stipulated period. In response to the notice dated 26.01.2016 issued to the petitioner, a reply was filed on 25.02.2016 stating therein that as all the members of the Gram Panchayat were elected unopposed without holding any elections, the statement of account of expenses was not submitted. The petitioner was then given notice of hearing and the Additional Collector thereafter passed an order disqualifying the petitioner for failure to submit the statement of account of election expenses as per the provisions of Section 14B of the said Act. The petitioner being aggrieved, filed an appeal under Section 16(2) of the said Act. The Additional Commissioner held that even though the petitioner and other members were elected unopposed, as the election process had been completed it was necessary for the elected candidates and especially the petitioner to have submitted the statement of account of election expenses as required. As the same was not done, the order of disqualification as passed by the Additional Collector was upheld. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has challenged the aforesaid order.

4. Shri I.N.Chaudhari, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the light of the admitted position that all members of the Gram Panchayat had been elected unopposed without there being any contest, the petitioner did not lodge the account of election expenses. The fact that all the members were elected unopposed itself indicated that the petitioner was not required to either canvas or seek any vote in her favour. There was no need to spend any amount in the elections while being so elected. He submitted that under the provisions of Section 14B of the said Act, it was necessary for the Additional Collector to have considered this relevant reason before proceeding to disqualify the petitioner. He referred to the observations in Vaijayata Deepak Warke and others Vs. State Election Commission and others, 2016 (2) Mh.L.J. 35 to support his contentions and submitted that the impugned order of disqualification was liable to be set aside.

5. Shri A.V.Palshikar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents supported the impugned order by relying on the affidavit in reply. He submitted that in view of the fact that the elections were held and the petitioner failed to submit his account of election expenses within the prescribed period, the disqualification as prescribed under Section 14B of the said Act stood attracted. Mere fact the petitioner was elected unopposed could not be a reason for not submitting the account of election expenses. The impugned orders were passed after considering all relevant aspects and hence there was no case to interfere with the same. He submitted that the writ petition was liable to be dismissed.

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the part