SHRIKANT CHAHAKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Heard finally by consent of the learned Counsel of the learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) This petition raises an interesting question about rights and duties of representatives democratically elected to local self-governing body.

(3.) The petitioners as well as respondent No. 2 are elected members jof Gram Panchayat, Mahadulla. One Smt. Nirmala Bonde had been elected as Sarpanch According to the petitioners, since Smt. Nirmala Bonde was not acting in the interest of Gram Panchayat and people at large, they moved a motion of no confidence on 5-8-2006, which was passed by majority. The Collector had unseated Smt. Nirmala Bonde as a result of no confidence motion being passed. Thereafter elections for the post of Sarpanch and Up-Sarpanch were held and the petitioner Nos. 2 and 7 claimed to have been elected as Sarpanch and Up-Sarpanch respectively. Smt. Nirmala Bonde's appeal before the Commissioner was, however, pending. It seems that respondent No. 2 Ratnadeep Rangari was also shown as Ex Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, though it is not clear from the petition as to how and when said Ratnadeep Rangari became Sarpanch.