Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Ruprao Vithobaji Dhok, a member of Gram Panchayat Isapur, challenged the order of the Additional Commissioner, Amravati Division, which set aside the disqualification of respondent nos. 5 and 6 (Arvind Marotrao Chaudhari and Pratibha Manohar Kohale) under Section 14(h) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958. The Additional Collector had disqualified them for failing to pay taxes due to the Gram Panchayat within three months from the date of demand. The bills were dated 01.08.2010, and the amount was deposited on 13.11.2010, i.e., after 3 months and 12 days. The Additional Commissioner held that the period of 15 days from the date of bill, which is the period prescribed for payment, should be excluded, thereby setting aside the disqualification. The High Court examined the provision and found that there is no provision in the Act to exclude the period specified in the bill for payment of tax. The court held that the three-month period under Section 14(h) runs from the date of demand, and the period given in the bill for payment is not to be excluded. Therefore, the Additional Commissioner's order was quashed, and the disqualification order of the Additional Collector was restored. The petition was allowed.
Headnote
A) Gram Panchayat - Disqualification of Members - Section 14(h) Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958 - Non-payment of taxes - The period of 15 days specified in the bill for payment cannot be excluded from the three-month period under Section 14(h). The Additional Commissioner erred in excluding such period. The disqualification order passed by the Additional Collector was upheld. (Paras 4-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the period of 15 days specified in the tax bill for payment should be excluded from the three-month period under Section 14(h) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958 for disqualification of a member for non-payment of taxes.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The order dated 05.02.2011 passed by the Additional Collector disqualifying respondent nos. 5 and 6 under Section 14(h) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958 is restored. The order of the Additional Commissioner is quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute in those terms. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Disqualification under Section 14(h) of Bombay Village Panchayat Act
- 1958
- Period of limitation for payment of tax
- Exclusion of period specified in bill
- Gram Panchayat member disqualification
Case Details
2012 LawText (BOM) (08) 153
WRIT PETITION NO. 3485/2011
Shri P.P.Dhok for petitioner, Smt. K.R.Deshpande (AGP) for respondent nos. 1 to 3, Shri D.R.Rupnarayan for respondent nos. 5, 6, 8 & 9
The Additional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati; The Additional Collector, Amravati; The Tahsildar, Warud; Gram Panchayat, Isapur; Arvind Marotrao Chaudhari; Pratibha Manohar Kohale; Poonam Kisanlal Parteni; Manoj Bhagwan Gadge; Ranjana Jagdish Gadge; Sandhya Kishor Yawale
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the order of the Additional Commissioner setting aside disqualification of Gram Panchayat members under Section 14(h) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of the Additional Commissioner's order and restoration of the Additional Collector's disqualification order.
Filing Reason
The Additional Commissioner set aside the disqualification of respondent nos. 5 and 6 by excluding the period for payment specified in the tax bill from the three-month limitation period.
Previous Decisions
Additional Collector disqualified respondent nos. 5 and 6 on 05.02.2011; Additional Commissioner set aside that order on appeal.
Issues
Whether the period of 15 days specified in the tax bill for payment should be excluded from the three-month period under Section 14(h) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958 for disqualification of a member for non-payment of taxes.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that there is no provision to exclude the period specified in the bill for payment of tax.
Respondents argued that the period for payment should be excluded.
Ratio Decidendi
Under Section 14(h) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958, the three-month period for disqualification for non-payment of taxes runs from the date of demand, and the period specified in the bill for payment is not to be excluded as there is no provision for such exclusion.
Judgment Excerpts
There is no provision under the said Act to exclude the period specified in the bill for payment of tax, fees or cess.
The period of three months under Section 14(h) of the said Act is required to be counted from the date of demand and the period given in the bill for payment cannot be excluded.
Procedural History
The Additional Collector passed an order on 05.02.2011 disqualifying respondent nos. 5 and 6 under Section 14(h) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958. Respondent nos. 5 and 6 appealed to the Additional Commissioner, who set aside the disqualification order. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition challenging the Additional Commissioner's order.
Acts & Sections
- Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958: Section 14(h)
