CHANDRAKALA W/O VAIJANATHRAO GHATUL Vs. ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these L.P.A.'s are being disposed of by this common Order as the issue involved is the same.

(2.) A few common facts may be set out which would be essential for the purpose of disposing the controversy as raised in these Appeals.

(3.) The appellants preferred Appeals under Section 35 of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to the Collector, Parbhani. It was their contention that there ought to have been two separate motions against the Sarpanch and Upasarpanch. In the instant case the motions were contrary to Rule 2 of the Bombay Village Panchayats Sarpanch and Up-Sarpanch (No confidence Motion) Rules, 1975, which hereinafter shall be referred to as 'No Confidence Rules'. On hearing the parties, however, the learned Collector was pleased to dismiss the Appeals. Aggrieved by the order, Appeals were preferred to the Divisional Commissioner. In Appeals, the Divisional Commissioner held that considering the provisions of Section 35 of the Act, read with Rule 2 of the No Confidence Rules, the common motion moved was bad in law and contrary to the provisions of the Act and Rules. The Appeals were consequently allowed and the motion of no confidence as passed, was set aside.