Case Note & Summary
The petitioner was the Sarpanch of Grampanchayat Borgaon, Tq. Palam. Respondents Nos. 3 to 8, being members of the seven-member panchayat, submitted a requisition to the Tahsildar for convening a special meeting to consider a no confidence motion against the petitioner. The special meeting was held on 1.10.2012, where all six members present voted in favour of the motion, which was passed. The petitioner challenged the no confidence motion before the Additional Collector, Parbhani, contending that the requisition was received by the Peshkar instead of the Tahsildar, in violation of Section 35 of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958. The Additional Collector dismissed the dispute, upholding the motion. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. The sole legal issue was whether receipt of the requisition by the Peshkar, in the absence of the Tahsildar, satisfied the requirement of Section 35. The petitioner argued that Section 35 mandates personal receipt by the Tahsildar, relying on Yamunabai Laxman Chavan v. Sarubai Tukaram Jadhav (2004 (2) Mh.L.J. 1004). The State contended that the Tahsildar was on leave and no Naib-Tahsildar was available; the Peshkar, being the senior-most revenue officer, was officiating under Section 10(b) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, and thus authorized to receive the requisition, citing Mrs. Chandrakalabai W/o Kondiram Wankhede v. Balaji S/o Shahaji Dhoke (2000(4) Bom.C.R.157). The High Court examined the provisions of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, particularly Sections 7 and 10, and the Bombay Village Panchayats Act. It noted that the term 'Tahsildar' in Section 35 is not used as persona designata but denotes an office. When the Tahsildar is unable to perform duties due to leave, Section 10(b) provides for temporary succession by the senior-most subordinate revenue officer, who is held to be the Tahsildar under the Code. In the present case, the Peshkar validly received the requisition as the officiating officer. Consequently, the no confidence motion was not vitiated. The writ petition was dismissed, with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Village Panchayats - No Confidence Motion - Requisition Notice to Tahsildar - Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958, Section 35 - The petitioner, Sarpanch, challenged the no confidence motion on ground that the requisition was received by the Peshkar, not the Tahsildar, contrary to Section 35 which requires notice to the Tahsildar. The Additional Collector dismissed the dispute. The High Court held that since the Tahsildar was on leave and no Naib-Tahsildar was available, the Peshkar as senior-most revenue officer under Section 10(b) of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code could validly receive the requisition, and the no confidence motion was not vitiated. (Paras 2, 3, 6, 15-17). B) Statutory Interpretation - Persona Designata - Interpretation of Statutory Officers - Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958, Section 35 read with Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, Sections 7, 10 - The court examined whether the term 'Tahsildar' in Section 35 is used as persona designata, i.e., a specific individual, or as an office. Relying on the nature of functions and the statutory scheme, it concluded that the term denotes an office, and temporary vacancies can be filled by subordinate officers under Section 10 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. The requirement is fulfilled if the notice is given to the officer currently performing the duties of the Tahsildar. (Paras 12-15).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the notice of no confidence motion under Section 35 of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958 must be received by the Tahsildar personally, or whether receipt by the Peshkar (senior-most revenue officer) when the Tahsildar is on leave is valid?
Final Decision
Writ petition dismissed. No confidence motion upheld; receipt of requisition by Peshkar held valid.
Law Points
- Interpretation of 'Tahsildar' not as persona designata
- Senior-most subordinate revenue officer can receive requisition under Section 35 when Tahsildar unavailable per Section 10(b) of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code
- Validity of no confidence motion if requisition received by Peshkar
