SHAIKH MOBIN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the impugned order dtd. 25/4/2025 passed by the District Collector, Parbhani in case No. 2024/SP/GPN-2/PK 02, thereby disqualifying the petitioner to be a member-Sarpanch of Grampanchayat Kausadi, Tq. Jintur, District Parbhani in terms of provisions contained in Sec. 7(1) r/w. 36 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1958).

(2.) Brief facts, leading to the institution of the present writ petition are summarized as under :-

(3.) Mr. V.D. Sapkal, learned Senior Counsel for petitioner submits that the only charge stated to be proved against the petitioner is charge Nos. 3 and 4 whereas charge Nos. 1 and 2 as regards not holding the monthly meetings are concerned, the said charge is not established. Charge Nos. 3 and 4 relates to non holding of the Gram Sabha meeting. The learned Senior counsel submits that except one all other Gram Sabha meetings are defacto held. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Collector was required to specify the charge as directed by earlier order of this court and the Collector was required to consider whether the meetings were not held for sufficient reasons. As regards charge Nos. 3 and 4 are concerned, the learned Senior Counsel submits that the petitioner was elected as Sarpanch on 22/9/2022 and he took charge of the said post on 6/10/2022 and that the first meeting was required to be held in November 2022. In this regard, the learned Senior Counsel submits that the petitioner had taken charge in the middle of the financial year in October 2022 and the meeting of the Gram Sabha was not taken in the month of November 2022 immediately after assuming charge and the petitioner had taken the subsequent meeting of Gram Sabha in the month of January 2023. The petitioner was also not guided by the Gramsevak (Secretary of Panchayat) members or any officials of the Panchayat for calling the Gram Sabha meeting. The learned Senior Counsel particular points out Sec. 7 of the Act of 1958 and submitted that as newly elected Sarpanch of the Panchayat in October 2022, he was not fully aware as to the requirement of holding the Gram Sabha meeting immediately in November 2022. As regards the meeting held in January 2023 is concerned, it is alleged in the charge that it was not conducted with requisite quorum and that the petitioner submits that requisite quorum in terms of meeting rules is of 15% of the Panchayat voters or 100 voters whichever is less. The meeting was attained by 84 voters in January 2023. The learned Senior Counsel submits that there is substantial compliance in respect of the meeting held in January 2023 and even in terms of the rules, at the best, the petitioner could have deferred the meeting and thereafter, the meeting could have been held with 84 voters or even with less number of voters. The learned Senior Counsel submits that at the highest, it can be said that there was infraction of rules in holding the meeting and disqualification cannot be imposed for such infraction of rules. The learned Senior Counsel particularly relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ravi Yashwant Bhoir Vs. District Collector, Raigad and Ors., reported in AIR 2012 SC 1339 , so also judgment of this court passed on 24/2/2023 in Writ Petition No. 9427/2022 in the case of Shri Manohar s/o. Dnyaneshwar Pote Vs. The Collector, Jalna and Ors.