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

2022 Supreme(Bom) 460

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Bharati H. Dangre, J.
Vilas s/o Bhagwat Jagtap - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra, Through the Minister, Rural Development Department and ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 13348 of 2021
Decided On : 07-02-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Mayur Salunke h/f Mr. V. D. Salunke, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. A. A. Jagatkar, AGP, Mr. P. D. Suryawanshi, Advocate, Mr. A. A. Khande, Advocate, Mr. R. T. Deshmukh, Advocate

Headnote:

Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act - Section 39(3) and 57 - Elected as Sarpanch – Election - Petitioner came to be elected as Sarpanch of Village Panchayat, Mudegaon since he secured the maximum number of votes on being directly voted by residents of Village Panchayat - Election came to be conducted in month and on his election, petitioner started functioning as Sarpanch of said Village Panchayat, which comprised of nine members - Respondent no.4 in his complaint dated alleged that in term of Gram Panchayat for year wife of petitioner was Sarpanch and while he was a member, he had received a bill in name Stone Crusher by depicting that work of construction road between Mudegaon to Wangdari in Gram Panchayat under MREGS was carried out by Mudeshwar Stone Crusher - It was alleged in complaint that this entity, is not in existence but by fraudulently depicting that work is carried out by said entity, false bills were raised and amount came to be disbursed and this act resulted in misappropriation of amount to the benefit of Petitionert – Held, it was duty of Sarpanch to initiate appropriate action but fact that he kept mum for a period of three years established charge of misconduct against him, since it was his duty to ensure that village fund is properly maintained and utilised and every penny received in form of tax, find an entry in village fund and only with permission of Gram Panchayat / Gram Sabha, money could have been spent for purpose assigned in Act - Aforesaid finding recorded by Divisional Commissioner and which is upheld by Hon'ble Minister is based on fact finding report of Panchayat Samitee and no fault can lie with authorities who have arrived at a conclusion that as a Sarpanch, petitioner has failed to discharge his duties and on the other hand he is guilty of an unacceptable or improper behaviour, amounting to misconduct, which deserve his removal from post of Sarpanch, by following procedure set out in Section 39 of Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act - Authorities have followed prescribed procedure and initiated an action thereafter which justify removal of petitioner - Writ petition is dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner, an elected Sarpanch of Village Panchayat Mudegaon, Tq. Ambajogai, Dist. Beed, is aggrieved by two orders; the first order dated 04.11.2020 passed by the Additional Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad, removing him from the post of Sarpanch for his remaining term and the second order being the order dated 01.11.2021, passed by the State Minister (Rural Development) in an Appeal under Section 39(3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, when the order of removal is upheld.

2. Heard learned Counsel Shri. Mayur V. Salunke holding for Shri. V. D. Salunke for the petitioner, the learned AGP for respondent/State, learned Advocate Shri. P. D. Suryawanshi for respondent no. 3, learned Advocate Shri. A. A. Khande for respondent no. 4 and learned Counsel Shri. R. T. Deshmukh for respondent no.5.

Considering the subject matter of the writ petition, it is heard finally by consent of the parties. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

3. The petitioner came to be elected as Sarpanch of Village Panchayat, Mudegaon since he secured the maximum number of votes on being directly voted by the residents of the Village Panchayat, Mudegaon. The election came to be conducted in the month of October-2017 and on his election, the petitioner started functioning as Sarpanch of the said Village Panchayat, which comprised of nine members.

The contention of the petitioner is, on account of the political rivalry in the village, one Pravin Shesherao Jagtap, the respondent no. 4, instituted a complaint with the Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad, alleging irregularity in the functioning of the petitioner as Sarpanch and seeking his removal from the said post on the allegations of corruption and misappropriation in discharge of his duties.

The respondent no.4 in his complaint dated 30.01.2020 alleged that in the term of Gram Panchayat for the year 2012-17, the wife of the petitioner, Smt. Pratiksha Vilas Jagtap was the Sarpanch and while he was a member, he had received a bill of Rs. 2,61,800/- in the name of Mudeshwar Stone Crusher by depicting that the work of construction of road between Mudegaon to Wangdari in Gram Panchayat under the MREGS was carried out by Mudeshwar Stone Crusher. It was alleged in the complaint that this entity, is not in existence but by fraudulently depicting that the work is carried out by the said entity, false bills were raised and the amount came to be disbursed and this act resulted in misappropriation of amount of Rs.2,61,888/-, to the benefit of the Petitioner. The complainant further alleged that a complaint dated 06.01.2018 was lodged with the Block Development Officer, Ambajogai about the alleged misappropriation and a committee comprised of the Extension Officer, Block Development Officer and the Tahsildar had conducted an inquiry, which confirmed the accusations levelled by the complainant, by recording that the petitioner has misappropriated the amount and orders came to be issued by the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Beed to register an offence against the petitioner and other concerned persons, responsible for misappropriation.

The complaint therefore accused the petitioner of misusing his office of Sarpanch and for misappropriating the amount of the Gram Panchayat, apart from he being involved in various irregularities when he was discharging his duties as Sarpanch.

A request was made to the authority to remove him from the post of Sarpanch and to recover the misappropriated amount from him, by registering an offence.

4. On the complaint being preferred to the Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad, the Chief Executive Officer was authorized by him to submit a report by letter dated 01.02.2020 and show-cause notice came to be issued to the Petitioner on 11.03.2020 confronting him with the reports submitted by the Block Development Officer, Ambajogai on 25.02.2020. On receipt of his response vide letter dated 26.05.2020, the Chief Executive Officer forwarded his inquiry report to

      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
      logo-black

      An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

      Please visit our Training & Support
      Center or Contact Us for assistance

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top