Case Note & Summary
The Petitioner, Sau. Shubhangi Sharad Gondhali, was elected as a member of the Revdanda Grampanchayat in June 2013 and subsequently elected as Sarpanch on 27 July 2013. Respondent No.1, Smt. Sonali Santosh More, also a member, filed a complaint dated 21 August 2015 seeking action under Section 39 of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act (now Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act), 1958, alleging misconduct. The Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division, passed an order on 1 February 2016 removing the Petitioner from the post of Sarpanch. The Petitioner appealed to the Minister, Rural Development, who dismissed the appeal on 9 March 2016, confirming the removal. The Petitioner then filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the Minister's order. The High Court examined the scope of its writ jurisdiction, noting that it does not act as an appellate authority and can interfere only if the impugned order suffers from an error of law or procedure or is perverse. The court found that the Petitioner failed to demonstrate any such error. The Minister had considered the material on record and passed a reasoned order. The court also noted that the Petitioner had an alternative remedy of approaching the civil court, but that did not bar the writ jurisdiction if a jurisdictional error existed. However, no such error was found. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the removal of the Petitioner as Sarpanch.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Article 226 of Constitution of India - Scope of Judicial Review - The High Court, while exercising writ jurisdiction, does not act as an appellate authority and can interfere only if the impugned order suffers from an error of law or procedure or is perverse. The court found no such error in the Minister's order dismissing the appeal against removal of Sarpanch under Section 39 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958. (Paras 1-13)
B) Local Self-Government - Removal of Sarpanch - Section 39 of Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958 - Misconduct - The Petitioner, elected Sarpanch, was removed by the Divisional Commissioner on grounds of misconduct based on a complaint by another member. The Minister dismissed the appeal, and the High Court upheld the order, noting that the Petitioner failed to demonstrate any jurisdictional error or violation of natural justice. (Paras 3-13)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order passed by the Hon'ble Minister, Rural Development, dismissing the Petitioner's appeal against her removal as Sarpanch under Section 39 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958, suffers from any error of law or procedure warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the order of the Minister dated 09/03/2016 and the order of the Divisional Commissioner dated 01/02/2016, thereby confirming the removal of the Petitioner from the post of Sarpanch.
Law Points
- Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India
- Scope of judicial review of quasi-judicial orders
- Section 39 of Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act
- 1958 - Removal of Sarpanch for misconduct
- Alternative remedy not a bar when jurisdictional error exists
Case Details
2016 LawText (BOM) (03) 55
Writ Petition No.3174 of 2016
Mr. S S Kulkarni i/by Mr. Sachin Chavan for the Petitioner, Mr. C G Gavnekar i/by Mr. P P Raul for the Respondent No.1, Mrs. S S Bhende, AGP for the Respondent Nos. 3 to 7
Sau. Shubhangi Sharad Gondhali
Smt. Sonali Santosh More, The Revdanda Grampanchayat, The Collector, The Divisional Commissioner, The Minister, The Tahasildar, The State of Maharashtra
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of the Minister, Rural Development, dismissing the appeal against removal of the Petitioner as Sarpanch.
Remedy Sought
The Petitioner sought quashing of the Minister's order dated 09/03/2016 and the Divisional Commissioner's order dated 01/02/2016, and restoration to the post of Sarpanch.
Filing Reason
The Petitioner was removed as Sarpanch by the Divisional Commissioner on grounds of misconduct under Section 39 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958, and her appeal was dismissed by the Minister.
Previous Decisions
The Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division, passed an order on 01/02/2016 removing the Petitioner from the post of Sarpanch. The Minister, Rural Development, dismissed the appeal on 09/03/2016, confirming the removal.
Issues
Whether the impugned order of the Minister suffers from any error of law or procedure warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Submissions/Arguments
The Petitioner argued that the Minister's order was arbitrary and without proper application of mind.
The Respondent No.1 and the State supported the orders, contending that the removal was justified on grounds of misconduct.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court, while exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226, does not act as an appellate authority and can interfere only if the impugned order suffers from an error of law or procedure or is perverse. In the present case, the Petitioner failed to demonstrate any such error, and the Minister's order was reasoned and based on material on record. Hence, no interference was warranted.
Judgment Excerpts
The writ jurisdiction of this Court is invoked against the order dated 09/03/2016 passed by the Hon'ble Minister, Rural Development...
The facts giving rise to the above Petition in brief can be stated thus...
The Petitioner was elected as a member of the Grampanchayat...
The Respondent No.1 herein who is also a member of the Grampanchayat complained against the Petitioner...
The Divisional Commissioner passed an order on 01/02/2016 removing the Petitioner from the post of Sarpanch.
The Petitioner appealed to the Minister, who dismissed the appeal on 09/03/2016.
The court found no error of law or procedure in the impugned order.
Hence, the writ petition is dismissed.
Procedural History
The Petitioner was elected Sarpanch on 27/07/2013. On 21/08/2015, Respondent No.1 filed a complaint under Section 39 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958. The Divisional Commissioner passed an order on 01/02/2016 removing the Petitioner. The Petitioner appealed to the Minister, who dismissed the appeal on 09/03/2016. The Petitioner then filed the present writ petition on 16/03/2016, which was dismissed by the High Court on the same day.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958: Section 39
- Constitution of India: Article 226
