Disqualification of a Sarpanch under the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act requires clear proof of direct or indirect interest in the awarded contracts, which was not established.

JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner, Sarpanch of Village Panchayat Malwada, is aggrieved by her disqualification vide order dated 03/07/2019, by the Collector Nanded, under Section 14 (1)(g) read with Section 16 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 1958 Act’) The order of disqualification was upheld by the Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad in an appeal filed by her when her appeal came to be dismissed on 23/10/2019.

On the writ petition being filed, the notice is issued to the respondent No.1, and also to the other authorities being impleaded as respondent Nos.2 to 5.

2. I have heard the learned Counsel Shri. Ankush Nagargoje for the petitioner and the learned Counsel Shri. Umakant Deshmukh for respondent No.1. The State authorities are represented by the learned AGP Shri. K.B. Jadhavar.

Since the respective learned Counsel express their consensus to argue the writ petition finally at the stage of admission, I have issued “Rule”. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties.

3. The facts involved lie in a narrow compass and would reveal that the petitioner came to be elected as Sarpanch of Village Panchayat, Malwada in the election held in October 2017. Pertinent to note that she came to be elected as Sarpanch directly from the voters in the wake of the manner effected in the 1958 Act in the form of Section 30A-IA by Maharashtra Village Panchayat Amendment Act of 2018. On being elected, she assumed the charge of the office on 24/12/2017. The Village Panchayat Malwada comprise of 7 members and one directly elected Sarpanch.

Respondent No.1 is the political rival of the petitioner and incidentally, he is also husband of Smt. Sunita Laxman Behare, who was holding office of Sarpanch, prior to the election of the petitioner. The petitioner defeated Smt. Sunita Behare and the respondent No.1 had a grudge against her and immediately upon election of the petitioner, he started lodging frivolous complaints and some of the members of the Panchayat, who were holding office along with the petitioner, also joined hands with him.

4. On 01/09/2018, the respondent No.1 filed a complaint with the Collector Nanded in the form of Dispute No.1/2018, seeking a declaration that the petitioner should be disqualified from the post of Sarpanch on the basis of the allegations levelled in the complaint, being that the petitioner is guilty of committing illegalities in making payment of Rs.54,500/- in name of an agency “Shivashish” Agency” and it was alleged in the complaint that the payment due under MNREGA Scheme, was illegally made and this amounted to misappropriation and provision of Section 14 (1)(g) of the 1958 Act was invoked to submit that she had incurred a disqualification and therefore, under Section 16 of the 1958 Act, the Collector is empowered to declare her disqualified.

The petitioner contested the said claim of disqualification by submitting that the allegations. in no way incur a disqualification as contemplated under Section 14 (1)(g), which operate in a distinct situation, where a member of Panchayat is directly or indirectly, by himself or his parner, any share or interest in any work done by order of the Panchayat, or in any contract with, by or on behalf of, or employment with or under the Panchayat. Alleging that the complaint was based on an obscure report submitted by the Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Mahur, which enquiry was conducted against her back and without her participation, it was submitted that the petitioner on assuming her office of Sarpanch, she had merely issued a cheque in favour of the concern agency, in wh