LAXMAN SHRIKRUSHNA JADHAV Vs. TANAJI NANA GHODKE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocates for the parties. By consent of the parties taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission.

(2.) The petition is filed by a member elected to the Grampanchayat who is held to be disqualified by the learned Collector, Latur by judgment and order dtd. 22/8/2022 and confirmed by the learned Additional Commissioner, Aurangabad by judgment and order dtd. 29/11/2022. The respondent No. 1 had raised a dispute before the learned Collector under Sec. 16 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act (for short "said Act") alleging that, the petitioner incurred disqualification under Sec. 14 (1) (j-3) of the said Act. The authorities found on the basis of panchanama dtd. 4/6/2013 that, encroachment is found on the land.

(3.) Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that, the panchanama dtd. 4/6/2013 which is produced in support of the case of the respondents which is already considered in the civil suit that was filed by the petitioner in the Civil Court in the year 2010. There is specific finding in the judgment in the civil suit i.e. Regular Civil Suit No. 368/2010 that, no any encroachment is proved. The panchanama was drawn at the request of defendants therein. This fact was brought to the notice of both the authorities. Both the authorities have referred to the said panchanama and the judgment in the civil suit, however, have not discussed anything about the said finding recorded by the Civil Court and have come to different conclusion than that of the Civil Court. There is no case of the respondents that, after 2013 any encroachment is done. It is also not a case that, pursuant to filing of the dispute fresh panchanama is drawn or the measurement is taken. He thus prays that, both the judgments deserve to be quashed and set aside firstly, for the reason that no Civil Court order is considered and secondly, there is no independent material collected to come to conclusion that there is an encroachment.