Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, elected members of Gram Panchayat Mahadulla, moved a no-confidence motion against Sarpanch Smt. Nirmala Bonde on 5-8-2006, which was passed by majority. The Collector unseated her. Subsequently, petitioner Nos.2 and 7 were elected as Sarpanch and Up-Sarpanch. Smt. Bonde's appeal before the Commissioner was pending. Respondent No.2 Ratnadeep Rangari was shown as Ex-Sarpanch. On 26-10-2006, Smt. Bonde complained to the authorities. The petitioners sought to quash the complaint and protect their positions. The court examined the rights of democratically elected representatives and held that the no-confidence motion was validly passed and the pending appeal does not invalidate it. The petition was allowed, and the complaint was quashed.
Headnote
A) Local Self-Government - No-Confidence Motion - Sarpanch - Section 35 Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961 - The court considered whether a no-confidence motion passed against a Sarpanch is valid despite a pending appeal. The court held that the motion was validly passed by majority and the pending appeal does not affect the motion's validity. (Paras 2-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a no-confidence motion passed against a Sarpanch is valid when an appeal against the motion is pending before the Commissioner.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The complaint made by Smt. Nirmala Bonde is quashed. The no-confidence motion and subsequent elections are upheld.
Law Points
- No-confidence motion
- Gram Panchayat
- Sarpanch
- democratically elected representatives
- rights and duties
- pending appeal
- Section 35 Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act
- 1961
