JUDGMENT :

1. The Petitioner is challenging the impugned order dated 12.01.2023, passed by the learned Collector, Jalgaon in Dispute Application No. 66 of 2022, wherein the Petitioner - Sarpanch of village Kanalda was disqualified under Section 36 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 for not holding the monthly meeting for the month of October 2021.

2. Heard Mr. Jitendra V. Patil, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. N.T. Bhagat, learned AGP for Respondent/State, Mr. Atmaram J. Patil, learned Counsel for Respondent Nos.3 to 5 and 17 and Mr. D.P. Palodkar holding for Mr. Paresh B. Patil (Borse), learned Counsel for Respondent Nos.6 to 16.

3. Brief facts leading to the filing of the petition can be summarized as under:-

A. The Petitioner is an elected Sarpanch of village Kanalda. Respondent No.6 to 16 are also the elected members of village Kanalda. The Petitioner is elected from the reserved category post. During the term of the Petitioner, the Respondents / Members filed Grampanchayat Dispute Application No.66 of 2022, before the Collector for not convening monthly meeting for the month of October 2021. In the said application, the allegation is that there is deliberate attempt by the petitioner / Sarpanch to suppress the approval / audit of expenses of September 2021 and accordingly the meeting for the month of October 2021 was not undertaken and, as such, the Respondents prayed for the disqualification of the Petitioner for violation of Section 36 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959. The Petitioner appeared before the Collector, Jalgaon and filed his reply. The defense of the Petitioner was that he has always convened meetings for all months, however, only in the month of October the Village Development Officer, surprisingly went on medical leave from 11.10.2021 and did not resume duties for the whole month. In view of the non availability of the Village Development Officer, the meeting for month of October 2021 could not be convened. The Petitioner also made a representation dated 27.10.2021 to his immediate superior officer Block Development Officer that due to non availability of the Village Development Officer the administration of the panchayat is stuck up. The petitioner also conveyed his inability to conduct the meeting on 29.10.2021, to the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon. Thereafter, the Petitioner tried to conduct the meeting of October month in November and accept the agenda for the month of September and October in the month of November. However, there was objection by the applicants to take up the agenda of the month of September and October in the month of November. The petitioner further submits that another officer was appointed on 27.10.2021 as a substitute of Village Development Officer. However, he also did not take charge till the end of the month and, as such, for the entire month the petitioner was handicapped in conducting monthly meeting for October 2021. The Collector, after considering the response filed by the Petitioner, disqualified the Petitioner.

B. Aggrieved by the judgment of the Collector, the Petitioner filed Writ Petition in the High Court, bearing Writ Petition No.10504 of 2022. After considering the matter on merits, this Hon’ble court in the aforesaid Writ Petition by Judgment and Order dated 11.10.2022, has held as under:-

"11. Mr. Kanade and Mr. Suryawanshi have laid great emphasis on the provisions of sub-section (11) of Section 7 of the Act of 1959 to contend that it was open for the petitioner to take assistance of various government officials to convene the meeting in absence of the Village Development Officer. However, the order passed by the Collector does not include any finding to this effect. Even though a specific contention was raised in the complaint filed by respondent no.6 to 16 about possibility of taking assistance of Talathi or Anganwadi Sevika for convening meeting, the Collector has ignored this aspect as well. Even with regard t