PRIYANKA ABHIJEET DEODHARE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issue that arises for consideration in the present Petition is whether failure to furnish copy of requisition sent by 1/3rd Members of Panchayat to Tehsildar proposing a motion of no confidence against a Sarparch, who is served with Tehsildar's notice convening the special meeting, would ipso facto vitiate the motion of no-confidence.

(2.) Petitioner, who is Sarpanch of Village Kaddhe, Taluka Khed, District Pune, has filed this Petition challenging the Order dtd. 27/8/2024 passed by the Collector, Pune rejecting Dispute Application No. 10 of 2024 filed by her under provisions of Sec. 35(3B) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 (Village Panchayats Act) in respect of no-confidence motion adopted against her in the meeting of Panchayat held on 8/1/2024.

(3.) Elections to the Gram Panchayat Kaddhe, Taluka Khed, District Pune were held on 15/1/2021. In the meeting of the Panchayat, Petitioner was initially elected as Member of the Panchayat and later she was elected as Sarpanch. Seven members of the Gram Panchayat submitted notice dtd. 1/1/2024 to Tahsildar, Taluka Junnar, District Pune for moving motion of no confidence against Sarpanch. Tahsildar accordingly convened meeting of Gram Panchayat on 8/1/2024 for presenting motion of no-confidence. Petitioner was apparently served notice prepared by Tahsildar on 1/1/2024 intimating the date and time of meeting scheduled to be held on 8/1/2024. It is Petitioner's case that the requisition submitted by 7 members for adoption of notice of no-confidence was not served on her.