Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sow. Pratibha w/o Sanjay Hulle, was the elected Sarpanch of Village Grampanchayat Waigaon. An application was received by the Additional Collector, Latur on 7 July 2009 alleging that the petitioner had failed to hold mandatory meetings of the Village Panchayat, which constituted a disqualification under Section 7 of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958. Without issuing any notice or affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the Additional Collector passed an order on 19 January 2010 declaring the petitioner disqualified and the post of Sarpanch vacant. The petitioner challenged this order by way of a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. The main legal issue was whether the order of disqualification passed without complying with principles of natural justice could be sustained. The petitioner argued that no notice or hearing was given before the order was passed. The respondents did not dispute this procedural lapse. The Court, after hearing the parties, held that the order was passed in gross violation of natural justice and therefore could not be sustained. The Court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter back to the Additional Collector for fresh consideration after giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. The petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Natural Justice - Opportunity of Hearing - Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958, Sections 7 and 76 - The Additional Collector passed an ex-parte order disqualifying the petitioner as Sarpanch for failure to hold mandatory meetings without issuing any notice or giving an opportunity of hearing. The High Court held that such an order violates principles of natural justice and is liable to be set aside. (Paras 3-5)
B) Panchayati Raj - Disqualification of Sarpanch - Failure to Hold Meetings - Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958, Section 7 - The petitioner was elected Sarpanch and an application was made alleging failure to hold mandatory meetings. The Additional Collector declared the petitioner disqualified without any prior notice. The Court held that the order was passed in violation of natural justice and quashed it. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order of disqualification passed by the Additional Collector under Section 7 read with Section 76 of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958, without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 19 January 2010 passed by the Additional Collector, Latur, is quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Additional Collector for fresh consideration after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- opportunity of hearing
- disqualification of Sarpanch
- failure to hold meetings
- Bombay Village Panchayat Act
- 1958
- Section 7
- Section 76
- ex-parte order
- procedural fairness
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (04) 14
Writ Petition No. 1083 of 2010
Mr. V.D. Gunale for petitioner; Mr. V.B. Ghatge, AGP for respondent no. 1; Mr. P.R. Tandale for respondent no. 2; Mr. V.D. Salunke for respondent no. 3; Mr. R.N. Dhorde holding for Mr. P.G. Rodge for respondent no. 4; Mr. S.M. Godsay holding for Mr. S.P. Sonpawale for respondent no. 5
Sow. Pratibha w/o Sanjay Hulle
The Additional Collector, Latur; The Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Udgir; The Village Grampanchayat Waigaon; Dhondiba s/o Keshav Jambhale; Gopal s/o Naga Turewale; Smt. Parvatibai w/o Mahadeo Wadkar
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging an order of disqualification passed by the Additional Collector under the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought quashing of the order dated 19 January 2010 passed by the Additional Collector, Latur, declaring her disqualified as Sarpanch.
Filing Reason
The petitioner was disqualified without being given any notice or opportunity of hearing, in violation of principles of natural justice.
Previous Decisions
The Additional Collector, Latur, passed an order on 19 January 2010 under Section 7 read with Section 76 of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958, declaring the petitioner disqualified and the post of Sarpanch vacant.
Issues
Whether the order of disqualification passed by the Additional Collector without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner is sustainable in law.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner submitted that no notice or opportunity of hearing was given before the impugned order was passed.
The respondents did not dispute the procedural lapse.
Ratio Decidendi
An order of disqualification passed under Section 7 read with Section 76 of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958, without issuing any notice or affording an opportunity of hearing to the affected person, is in gross violation of principles of natural justice and cannot be sustained. The matter must be remitted for fresh consideration after giving a proper hearing.
Judgment Excerpts
Order impugned in this petition is one passed by the Additional Collector, Latur on 19-1-2010. Additional Collector, Latur in exercise of powers conferred under section 7 r/w section 76 of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act has declared the petitioner, Sarpanch of the Village Panchayat, Waigaon, as having incurred disqualification...
It is the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner that no notice was issued to the petitioner nor any opportunity of hearing was granted before passing the impugned order. The order impugned is thus in gross violation of principles of natural justice and cannot be sustained.
Procedural History
The petitioner was elected Sarpanch of Village Grampanchayat Waigaon. An application was received by the Additional Collector on 7 July 2009 alleging failure to hold mandatory meetings. On 19 January 2010, the Additional Collector passed an order disqualifying the petitioner without notice or hearing. The petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 1083 of 2010 before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, challenging the order. The Court heard the matter on 16 April 2010 and allowed the petition, quashing the order and remitting the matter for fresh consideration.
Acts & Sections
- Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958: Section 7, Section 76
