Bombay High Court Allows Petition of Sarpanch Challenging Disqualification for Encroachment Due to Lack of Notice. Prior notice of inspection is mandatory before disqualifying a member under Section 14(1)(J-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused
  • 4
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Rekha Dadajwar, was the Sarpanch of Dabhad Village Panchayat. She was removed from office under Section 14(1)(J-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958, on allegations that her family had encroached upon 96 sq. ft. of land adjacent to their property, constructing a washroom and compound wall on a public road. The Block Development Officer conducted a measurement and submitted a report, based on which the District Collector declared her disqualified. Her appeal to the Additional Commissioner was dismissed. The petitioner challenged these orders in the Bombay High Court, arguing that no notice of inspection or measurement was served upon her, and she was unaware of the proceedings. The respondents contended that prima facie evidence of encroachment existed and that two concurrent orders supported the disqualification. The court framed the issue of whether prior notice of inspection was obligatory. Relying on the principle of natural justice and the precedent in Sau. Lalita Dilip Khandalkar v. Additional Commissioner, Amravati, 2019 (6) ALL MR 261, the court held that without notice, the proceedings were vitiated. The court set aside the impugned orders and remitted the matter to the District Collector for a fresh inquiry after giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing and notice of inspection. The writ petition was allowed.

Headnote

A) Panchayat Law - Disqualification of Member - Encroachment - Section 14(1)(J-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958 - Natural Justice - Prior Notice - The petitioner, a Sarpanch, was disqualified based on a report of encroachment by her family on public land. The court held that no notice of inspection or measurement was given to her, violating principles of natural justice. The disqualification order was set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Collector for fresh inquiry after giving notice to the petitioner. (Paras 6-8)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the issuance of inspection and measurement notice upon the petitioner was obligatory before declaring her disqualified under Section 14(1)(J-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned orders of the District Collector and Additional Commissioner, and remitted the matter to the District Collector for a fresh inquiry after giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing and notice of inspection.

Law Points

  • Natural justice
  • prior notice
  • inspection
  • measurement
  • encroachment
  • disqualification
  • Sarpanch
  • Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act
  • 1958
  • Section 14(1)(J-3)
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2024 LawText (BOM) (04) 8

WRIT PETITION NO. 13206 OF 2023

2024-04-03

S.G. MEHARE, J.

2024:BHC-AUG:7346

Mr. Patil Nileshsingh J (for Petitioner), Mrs. M.L. Sangit (AGP for Respondent/State), Mr. S.B. Pulkundwar (for Respondent No.3)

Rekha W/o Raghunath Dadajwar

The State of Maharashtra, The Additional Divisional Commissioner, The Block Development Officer, The Gramsevak, Akash S/o Bhagwan Suryawanshi, The Maharashtra State Election Commission

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging the order of disqualification of a Sarpanch under the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958.

Remedy Sought

The petitioner sought quashing of the orders of the District Collector and Additional Commissioner declaring her disqualified as a member of the Panchayat.

Filing Reason

The petitioner was disqualified without being given prior notice of inspection or measurement of the alleged encroachment.

Previous Decisions

The District Collector declared the petitioner disqualified under Section 14(1)(J-3) of the Act of 1958. The Additional Commissioner upheld that order on appeal.

Issues

Whether the issuance of inspection and measurement notice upon the petitioner was obligatory before declaring her disqualified under Section 14(1)(J-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that no notice of inspection or measurement was served upon her, and she did not know when her house was measured. The order declaring her disqualified is bad in law. Respondents argued that prima facie evidence of encroachment was collected, and there were two consecutive judgments against the petitioner, so the petition should be dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi

The issuance of inspection and measurement notice upon the petitioner was obligatory. Without such notice, the proceedings violated principles of natural justice, and the disqualification order cannot be sustained.

Judgment Excerpts

A small question is whether the issuance of inspection and measurement notice upon the petitioner was obligatory. The court held that without notice, the proceedings were vitiated.

Procedural History

The petitioner was removed as Sarpanch by the District Collector under Section 14(1)(J-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958. She appealed to the Additional Commissioner, who upheld the order. She then filed the present writ petition in the Bombay High Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958: Section 14(1)(J-3)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Petition of Sarpanch Challenging Disqualification for Encroachment Due to Lack of Notice. Prior notice of inspection is mandatory before disqualifying a member under Section 14(1)(J-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court at Goa Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Mutation Entry in Land Revenue Records — Mutation Entry Does Not Confer Title and Is Only for Fiscal Purposes. The court held that a writ petition under Article 226 is not maintainable fo...