Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Bhagwat Digambarrao Uphad, was elected as a Councilor of the Zilla Parishad. Respondent No.6, Vikram Hanumantrao Uphad, filed an application seeking his disqualification under Section 16(1)(h) of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961, alleging that the petitioner held an office of profit as Secretary of the Watershed Management Committee (Panlot Samiti) with an honorarium of Rs.3,000 per month. The Additional Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad, allowed the application and disqualified the petitioner. The petitioner challenged this order before the Bombay High Court. The High Court noted that the petitioner was recommended by the Gram Sabha on 26/01/2013 to be nominated as Secretary of the Panlot Samiti, a Watershed Management Committee, under a circular dated 18/02/2010. He was engaged with an honorarium of Rs.3,000 per month. The court observed that the Watershed Committee is not a statutory body and the honorarium is merely a stipend, not a salary. The court held that the position does not constitute an 'office of profit' under Section 16(1)(h) of the Act. The court quashed the disqualification order and allowed the writ petition.
Headnote
A) Local Self-Government - Disqualification - Office of Profit - Section 16(1)(h) Maharashtra Zilla Parishad and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961 - The petitioner was appointed as Secretary of a Watershed Management Committee (Panlot Samiti) with an honorarium of Rs.3,000 per month. The Additional Commissioner disqualified him under Section 16(1)(h) for holding an office of profit. The High Court held that the position of Secretary of a Watershed Committee is not an office of profit under the Act, as the committee is not a statutory body and the honorarium is merely a stipend. The disqualification order was quashed. (Paras 3-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the position of Secretary of a Watershed Management Committee (Panlot Samiti) with an honorarium of Rs.3,000 per month constitutes an 'office of profit' under Section 16(1)(h) of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961, thereby disqualifying the petitioner from being a Zilla Parishad Councilor.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 09/07/2019 passed by the Additional Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad, is quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute accordingly.
Law Points
- Office of profit
- Disqualification
- Watershed Committee Secretary
- Honorarium
- Section 16(1)(h) Maharashtra Zilla Parishad and Panchayat Samitis Act
- 1961
Case Details
2019 LawText (BOM) (07) 17
Writ Petition No.8807 of 2019
Mr. S.S. Tope for petitioner; Mr. S.R. Yadav, AGP for respondent Nos.1,2 and 5; Mr. V.D. Salunke h/f Mr. V.A. Bagal for respondent No.6
Bhagwat s/o Digambarrao Uphad
The State of Maharashtra and others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging disqualification order under Section 16(1)(h) of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of the order dated 09/07/2019 passed by the Additional Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad, disqualifying the petitioner as a Zilla Parishad Councilor.
Filing Reason
The petitioner was disqualified for allegedly holding an office of profit as Secretary of a Watershed Management Committee with an honorarium of Rs.3,000 per month.
Previous Decisions
The Additional Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad, allowed the application of respondent No.6 and disqualified the petitioner under Section 16(1)(h) of the Act.
Issues
Whether the position of Secretary of a Watershed Management Committee (Panlot Samiti) with an honorarium of Rs.3,000 per month constitutes an 'office of profit' under Section 16(1)(h) of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the Watershed Committee is not a statutory body and the honorarium is merely a stipend, not a salary, and thus does not amount to an office of profit.
Respondent No.6 argued that the petitioner held an office of profit and was liable for disqualification.
Ratio Decidendi
The position of Secretary of a Watershed Management Committee (Panlot Samiti) with an honorarium of Rs.3,000 per month does not constitute an 'office of profit' under Section 16(1)(h) of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961, as the committee is not a statutory body and the honorarium is merely a stipend.
Judgment Excerpts
The said authority has concluded that the petitioner has incurred a disqualification since he has occupied an office of profit while he was elected as a Councilor of the Zilla Parishad.
The petitioner was engaged as a Secretary with an honorarium/ stipend of Rs.3,000 per month.
Procedural History
The petitioner was elected as a Zilla Parishad Councilor. Respondent No.6 filed an application for disqualification under Section 16(1)(h) of the Act. The Additional Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad, allowed the application on 09/07/2019. The petitioner filed the present writ petition challenging that order.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Zilla Parishad and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961: 16(1)(h)
