Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Swati Sachin Balge, was a member of the Village Panchayat, Tajnapur. Respondent No.1, Appasaheb Kisan Veer, applied under Sections 14(1)(j-3) and 16 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act to disqualify her for encroaching on government land. The Collector directed the Village Development Officer (VDO) to submit a factual report. The VDO inspected the spot and submitted a report on 25.01.2022. Respondent No.1 alleged that the petitioner resided with her father-in-law and husband in a house constructed on encroached government land (property No.203). It was also alleged that after inspection, an illegal resolution was passed transferring house No.203 to Subhadra Navnath Khedkar, which was invalid without approval of the Chief Executive Officer under Section 56(2) of the Act. The petitioner's counsel argued that the spot inspection report was vague and did not clearly state that the petitioner resided there, and no notice was given before inspection. The court found that the report lacked specificity and that the petitioner had segregated her name from the joint family ration card. The court quashed the disqualification order, holding that the evidence was insufficient to prove residence on encroached land.
Headnote
A) Panchayat Law - Disqualification of Member - Encroachment on Government Land - Sections 14(1)(j-3) and 16 of Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act - The Collector disqualified the petitioner for allegedly residing on government land. The court held that the spot inspection report was vague and did not clearly state that the petitioner resided there. No notice was given before inspection. The disqualification was quashed. (Paras 2-4) B) Panchayat Law - Transfer of Government Land - Section 56(2) of Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act - The Village Panchayat cannot transfer government land without approval of the Chief Executive Officer. The resolution transferring house No.203 was invalid. (Para 3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner was disqualified under Sections 14(1)(j-3) and 16 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act for residing on encroached government land.
Final Decision
The court quashed the disqualification order, holding that the evidence was insufficient to prove that the petitioner resided on encroached government land.
Law Points
- Disqualification under Section 14(1)(j-3) of Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act requires proof of residence on encroached government land
- Spot inspection report must be clear and specific
- Notice before inspection is mandatory
- Burden of proof on complainant
