SHRIDHAR DAMODHAR MEGHARE Vs. COMMISSIONER OF NAGPUR DIVISION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) A Gram Panchayat was established in Mouza Gawandi, Taluq and District Yeotmal under the Central Provinces and Berar Panchayats Act, 1946 (Act I of 1947). To this Panchayat, petitioner was elected a panch some time in the year 1956 prior to the date on which the States Reorganization Act came into force. Similarly, in due course, he was also elected Sarpanch of that Panchayat. It was then the policy of the Madhya Pradesh Government to give preference to Sarpanch as in the matter of appointing patels of the Village. In pursuance of this policy the petitioner was appointed the patel of that village after his election as a Sarpanch. As a result of the States Reorganization Act, Yeotmal district and some other territories became part of the newly organised State of Bombay, The Legislature of the State of Bombay enacted a law in the year 1959 called the Bombay Village Panchayats Act (Act III of 1959). It was enacted to amend and consolidate the law relating to the constitution and administration of village panchayats in the State of Bombay and certain other connected matters. It came into force on June 1, 1959, throughout the State of Bombay.

(3.) IT appears that purporting to act under the aforesaid two provisions of law, the Collector issued a notice to the petitioner to show cause why vacancies should not be declared in respect of the post of Sarpanch and the post of Panch held by the petitioner in view of the disqualification incurred by him by holding the post of a patel. It appears soon thereafter the Government changed its mind and informed its officers that Panchas or Sarpanch as under the Madhya Pradesh Act holding the post of Patel prior to the day the new Act came into force should not be disqualified from holding the post and should be given an option of resigning either the post of the Punch or the post of the patel. In pursuance of this decision of the Government, another communication was addressed to the petitioner. The material part reads thus: