RAMRAO CHUDAMAN PATIL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of the parties.

(2.) Both these petitions are being disposed of together inasmuch as identical questions of law and facts are involved therein. All these petitioners were members of village panchayat. They have been declared as disqualified from membership under Section 14(1)(h) of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958, on the ground that they failed to pay the property taxes due from them within the prescribed period. So, they were held as ineligible to remain in the office of the village panchayat as members.

(3.) The respondent no.5 Narendra raised dispute about eligibility of in all 8 members of the village panchayat, Hol. The application of respondent no.5 Narendra was duly enquired into by the Additional Collector, Dhule. Consequent upon verification of facts, it was noticed that the petitioners had committed defaults in payment of house property tax which was due from them, inspite the demand notices served on them, within the stipulated period. The petitioners were heard during the enquiry. They offered various explanations. Their contentions were considered by the Additional Collector. The explanations furnished by the petitioners were found to be dis-satisfatory. The Additional Collector, eventually, held that the petitioners were disqualified and cannot therefore continue to be members of the village panchayat in view of specific provision under Section-14(1)(h) of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act,1958 (for short "the Act"). The petitioners preferred appeal which was dismissed by the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik. Hence these petitions.