VIMAL BHIMRAO RATHOD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. M. A. Vaishnav and Mr. S. D. Chopde, learned counsel for petitioners in Writ Petition Nos. 2616 of 2008 and 2727 of 2008 respectively as well as Mr. N. W. Sambre, learned Government Pleader for respondents.

(2.) In view of the conflicting opinion expressed by two learned Single Judges of this Court in respect of exercise of appellate powers by the Additional Commissioner under section 16(2) of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as "the BVP Act"), the Hon'ble Chief Justice referred said issue to this Division Bench.

(3.) The learned Single Judge of Aurangabad Bench of Bombay High Court in the case of Atmaram Chapa Sandanshiv and another vs. Shamshadbi Bashir Shah Fakir and others, 2008 3 MhLJ 906 has taken a view that, the State Government, in view of provisions of section 182(1) of the BVP Act is legally entitled to delegate powers vested in it under section 16(2) of the BVP Act to the Commissioner only and it is impermissible for the Additional Commissioner to exercise those powers. Another learned Single Judge of the Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court in view of the notification dt. 20-4-1977, issued by the State Government in exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (3) of section 13 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code") has expressed different view; however, did not conclude the issue one way or the other and in view of decision of the Apex Court reported in Dr. Vijay Laxmi Sadho vs. Jagdish, 2001 2 SCC 247, (Para 33), referred the issue to the Hon'ble Chief Justice vide reference order dt. 14-7-2008 for constituting a Division Bench to resolve the controversy in issue. It is in this background that the Hon'ble Chief Justice has referred the issue to this Division Bench for resolving the controversy.