ASHOK S/O VITTHAL GABHANE Vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ADMIT. Heard finally by consent of the parties.

(2.) A short question, which arises for our consideration is whether the provisions of Rule 7 of the Bombay Village Panchayats (Meetings) Rules 1959, which deals with the manner of service of notice, can be made applicable to the special meetings required to be convened under Rule 35(2) of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for the sake of brevity) and whether service of notice on mother of the Member/Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat can be said to be a good service.

(3.) THE appellant raised dispute regarding validity of motion of no confidence and referred the same to the District Collector under the provisions of Section 35(3-B) of the Act. The Additional Collector by his order dated 15.05.2007, rejected the appellants dispute under Section 35(3-B) of the Act. The appellant, thereafter, under the provisions of Section 35(3-C) of the Act, preferred an appeal before the Additional Commissioner. The Additional Commissioner confirmed the order of the Additional Collector and dismissed the appellant's appeal by his order dated 27.06.2007. The appellant challenged the order of the Additional Commissioner before the High Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by filing Writ Petition No.3203/2007 before the learned Single Judge, which also came to be dismissed by order dated 24.07.2007, which order is being impugned in the present Letters Patent Appeal.