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

2024 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 7083

HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BHARAT PANDURANG DESHPANDE
PRAFUL S/O MOTIRAMJI PANCHBHAI AND ANOTHER – Appellant
Versus
ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER NAGPUR AND OTHERS – Respondent
WP/8185/2023



2024:BHC-NAG:3732 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO. 8179 OF 2023 Petitioners : 1. Pravin s/o Wamanrao Wasade, aged about 46 years, Occupation:Agriculturist, R/o Grampanchayat Yenikoni, Tq.Narkhed, Dist.Nagpur.

2. Rajkumar S/o Tanbaji Ghadge, aged about 58 years, Occupation : Agriculturist, R/o Grampanchayat Yenikoni, Tq.Narkhed, Dist.Nagpur.

-Versus-

Respondents : 1. Additional Commissioner, Nagpur, Tq. and Dist.Nagpur.

2. Additional Collector, Nagpur, Tq. and Dist.

Nagpur.

3. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Narkhed, Tq.Narkhed, Dist.Nagpur.

4. Sub-Divisional Engineer, Rural Water Supply Department, Sub-Division, Katol, Tq. Katol, Dist.Nagpur.

5. Grampanchayat Yenikoni, through its Secretary, Office at Yenikoni, Tq.Narkhed, Dist.Nagpur.

6. Usha W/o Manish Fuke, aged major, Occupation : Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Yenikoni, Tq. Narkhed, Dist. Nagpur.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. J.B.Kasat, counsel for the petitioners.

Mr.P. P. Pendke, AGP for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 4.

Mr.P.K.Raulkar, counsel for respondent No.3.

Mr.Abhay Sambre, counsel for respondent No.6.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WRIT PETITION NO. 8185 OF 2023 Petitioners : 1. Praful s/o Motiramji Panchbhai, aged about 45 years, Ocupation : Agriculturist, R/o Grampanchayat Yenikoni, Tq. Narkhed, Dist.Nagpur.

2. Wasudeo S/o Ramaji Gavande, aged about 52 years, Occupation : Agriculturist, R/o Grampanchayat Yenikoni, Tq.Narkhed, Dist.Nagpur.

-Vs.-

Respondents : 1. Additional Commissioner, Nagpur, Tq. and Dist.Nagpur.

2. Additional Collector, Nagpur, Tq. and Dist.

Nagpur.

3. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Narkhed, Tq.Narkhed, Dist.Nagpur.

4. Sub-Divisional Engineer, Rural Water Supply Department, Sub-Division, Katol, Tq.Katol, Dist.Nagpur.

5. Grampanchayat Yenikoni, through its Secretary, Office at Yenikoni, Tq.Narkhed, Dist.Nagpur.

6. Manish S/o Bhaiyyaji Fuke, aged major, Occupation : Up-sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Yenikoni, Tq.Narkhed, Dist.Nagpur.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. J.B.Kasat, counsel for the petitioners.

Mr.P. P. Pendke, AGP for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 4.

Mr.S.N.Gaikwad, counsel for respondent No.3.

Mr.Abhay Sambre, counsel for respondent No.6.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CORAM : BHARAT P. DESHPANDE, J. CLOSED ON : 8TH MARCH, 2024 PRONOUNCED ON : 28TH MARCH, 2024 JUDGMENT Heard.

2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with consent.

3. Both these petitions are filed challenging the orders passed by the Additional Commissioner, Nagpur, who allowed the appeals filed by respective respondent No.6 in both petitions and thereby reverting the orders passed by respondent No.2-Additional Collector, Nagpur.

4. The petitioners are the original complainants, who filed complaints against respondent No.6 claiming disqualification of respondent No.6 as sarpanch/upsarpanch of Gram Panchayat Yenikoni, Tahsil Narkhed, District Nagpur on the ground of Section 14(1)(g) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act (for short “MVP Act”).

5. The respondent No.2-Additional Collector after conducting necessary enquiry, found that respondent No.6 working as sarpanch/upsarpanch of the said village panchayat were directly or indirectly involved in the works carried out in the village panchayat and accordingly incurred disqualification from the said post.

6. The respondent No.6 filed two separate appeals before the Additional Commissioner, Nagpur, who allowed such appeals thereby quashing the orders passed by respondent No.2. The petitioners are thus before this Court challenging the orders of the Additional Commissioner, Nagpur.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that respondent No.6 while working as sarpanch/upsarpanch were directly or indirectly involved in the scheme for supplying of water, wherein the villag

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top