SUNIL BALARAM ROY Vs. DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard respective counsel. Grievance made by advocate Motghare, is that matter was circulated in vacation behind the back of respondents and interim orders were obtained, therefore, I have also considered the merits of the controversy. During hearing it has become apparent that, considering of all controversies at this stage, is final hearing of the matter itself. Hence, with the consent of the parties and in view of the grievance made by advocate Motghare, the matter is finally heard.

(2.) The petitioner before this Court has been removed under section 39 (1) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958 by resolution dated 18-12-2001, passed by the Standing Committee of Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli. It appears that he was elected as Member and Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Gauripur. Subsequently and in view of his removal under section 39, the present respondent No. 3 moved collector for disqualification under section 14 (1) (d) of Bombay Village panchayat Act. That application was allowed by the Collector and the appeal preferred by the petitioner under section 16 was also dismissed. Thereafter he approached this Court.

(3.) This Court on 21-4-2006 has issued notice before admission and granted liberty to the petitioner to move in vacation. As the election to fill in the vacancy caused by removal of the petitioner were scheduled in vacation, the petitioner moved in vacation and on 8-5-2006, this Court issued Rule and also protected his post as Sarpanch.