Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Sonali Gajanan Dhepe and Savita Madhukar Dhepe, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging the order of the Additional Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad, dated 30.09.2022, which disqualified the first petitioner as Sarpanch of Grampanchayat Kapsi (Kh) under Section 14(1)(j-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959. The disqualification was on the ground that the petitioner failed to convene a meeting of the Gram Sabha within the statutory period of three months. The petitioners contended that the meeting could not be convened due to lack of quorum, as only 10 members were present out of the required 15, and that the petitioner had made efforts to convene the meeting. The respondents argued that the petitioner was responsible for ensuring the meeting was held. The court examined the provisions of Section 14(1)(j-3) and held that the disqualification is attracted only when the failure to convene the meeting is attributable to the Sarpanch. In this case, the failure was due to the absence of quorum, which was not the fault of the petitioner. The court allowed the petition, set aside the disqualification order, and directed that the petitioner be reinstated as Sarpanch.
Headnote
A) Panchayati Raj - Disqualification of Sarpanch - Failure to convene Gram Sabha meeting - Section 14(1)(j-3) of Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 - The petitioner was disqualified as Sarpanch for not convening a Gram Sabha meeting within the statutory period of three months. The court held that the failure to convene the meeting was not attributable to the petitioner as the meeting was not convened due to the absence of the quorum and the petitioner had made efforts to convene the meeting. The disqualification order was set aside. (Paras 1-10)
B) Panchayati Raj - Attribution of default - Disqualification of Sarpanch - Section 14(1)(j-3) of Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 - The court held that for disqualification under Section 14(1)(j-3), the failure to convene the meeting must be attributable to the Sarpanch. If the failure is due to circumstances beyond the control of the Sarpanch, such as lack of quorum, the disqualification cannot be sustained. (Paras 5-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the disqualification of the petitioner as Sarpanch under Section 14(1)(j-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 for failure to convene a meeting of the Gram Sabha within the statutory period is sustainable when the failure was not attributable to the Sarpanch.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition, set aside the order dated 30.09.2022 passed by the Additional Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad, and directed that the first petitioner be reinstated as Sarpanch of Grampanchayat Kapsi (Kh).
Law Points
- Disqualification of Sarpanch
- Failure to convene Gram Sabha meeting
- Statutory period for meeting
- Attribution of default
- Section 14(1)(j-3) of Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act
- 1959
Case Details
2023 LawText (BOM) (01) 13
Writ Petition No.4758 of 2022
Mr. Umakant B. Deshmukh for Petitioners, Mr. K. B. Jadhavar (AGP) for Respondent/State, Ms. Yogita Thorat for Respondent Nos.2&3, Mr. A. B. Kadethankar for Respondent No.4, Mr. G. R. Ingole for Respondent No.6
Sonali Gajanan Dhepe and Savita Madhukar Dhepe
The Additional Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad and others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging disqualification of Sarpanch under Section 14(1)(j-3) of Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought quashing of the order dated 30.09.2022 passed by the Additional Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad, disqualifying the first petitioner as Sarpanch, and for reinstatement.
Filing Reason
The first petitioner was disqualified as Sarpanch for allegedly failing to convene a Gram Sabha meeting within the statutory period of three months.
Previous Decisions
The Additional Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad, by order dated 30.09.2022, disqualified the first petitioner as Sarpanch under Section 14(1)(j-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959.
Issues
Whether the disqualification of the petitioner as Sarpanch under Section 14(1)(j-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 for failure to convene a meeting of the Gram Sabha within the statutory period is sustainable when the failure was not attributable to the Sarpanch.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the meeting could not be convened due to lack of quorum, as only 10 members were present out of the required 15, and that the petitioner had made efforts to convene the meeting.
Respondents argued that the petitioner, as Sarpanch, was responsible for ensuring the meeting was held and that the failure to convene the meeting attracted disqualification.
Ratio Decidendi
For disqualification under Section 14(1)(j-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959, the failure to convene the Gram Sabha meeting within the statutory period must be attributable to the Sarpanch. If the failure is due to circumstances beyond the control of the Sarpanch, such as lack of quorum, the disqualification cannot be sustained.
Judgment Excerpts
The failure to convene the meeting of the Gram Sabha within the statutory period must be attributable to the Sarpanch.
In the present case, the meeting could not be convened due to lack of quorum, which was not attributable to the petitioner.
Procedural History
The first petitioner was elected as Sarpanch of Grampanchayat Kapsi (Kh). The Additional Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad, by order dated 30.09.2022, disqualified her under Section 14(1)(j-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 for failure to convene a Gram Sabha meeting within three months. The petitioners filed Writ Petition No.4758 of 2022 before the Bombay High Court challenging the disqualification order.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959: Section 14(1)(j-3)
