SUBHASH BHAGWAN JADHAV Vs. ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) The petition challenges the order dtd. 29/5/2023, passed by the Additional Collector, Yavatmal, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner under Sec. 35(3)(b) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act has been rejected. The only ground raised by Mr. Karia, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the notice of no confidence dtd. 09/3/2023, against the petitioner did not bear the verification, as was contemplated by the form of notice of motion of no confidence under Rule 2(2) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Sarpanch Upsarpanch (No Confidence Motion) Rules, 1975. He therefore, submits that since the initial notice itself is inform all subsequent action thereafter cannot be sustained.

(3.) Mr. A.A. Zade, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 to 12 submits, that merely because the verification has not been appended to the notice of no confidence against the petitioner that by itself would not make either the notice of no confidence illegal or the subsequent actions so. It is contended, that consequent to the notice of no confidence, which is moved by 8 members of the Grampanchayat in a meeting held there-in-after on 13/3/2023, in the total strength of 11 members, 9 members voted in favour of the no confidence motion. He contends, that absence of verification would not be something affect the validity of motion.