Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shishupal Kawduji Chavan, filed a writ petition challenging the order of the Additional Commissioner, Nagpur Division, which upheld the disqualification of respondent no.3, Alkatai Dilipji Shastri, as a member of Gram Panchayat Pipla. The disqualification was originally ordered by the Additional Collector, Nagpur, on 2 August 2017, under Section 14(1)(j-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1958, on the ground that respondent no.3 was in unauthorized occupation of government land. The petitioner contended that the encroachment was not by respondent no.3 herself but by her relative, and therefore, as per the earlier Supreme Court decision in Sagar Pandurang Dhundare v. Keshav Aaba Patil (2018), the disqualification should not apply. However, the Court noted that a subsequent three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court had overruled Sagar Pandurang Dhundare and held that disqualification under Section 14(1)(j-3) applies even if the encroachment is by a relative, provided the member also occupies the same property. In this case, it was found that respondent no.3 was also in occupation of the encroached property along with her relative. Therefore, the Court dismissed the petition, upholding the disqualification. The Court also directed that the matter be placed before the appropriate Bench for consideration of the question of law regarding the applicability of the overruling decision, but ultimately confirmed the disqualification.
Headnote
A) Panchayati Raj - Disqualification of Member - Section 14(1)(j-3) of Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1958 - Encroachment by Relative - The issue was whether a Gram Panchayat member is disqualified when encroachment is by a relative, not the member himself. The Court held that the earlier view in Sagar Pandurang Dhundare v. Keshav Aaba Patil (2018) that disqualification applies only if the member himself encroaches has been overruled by a three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court. Now, if the member also occupies the same property along with the relative, the disqualification applies. The Court upheld the disqualification of respondent no.3. (Paras 2-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a member of Gram Panchayat is disqualified under Section 14(1)(j-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1958 when the encroachment or unauthorized occupation is made not by the member himself but by a relative of the member, and the member also occupies the same property.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. The order of disqualification of respondent no.3 under Section 14(1)(j-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1958 is upheld. Rule is discharged. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Disqualification under Section 14(1)(j-3) of Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act
- 1958 applies even if encroachment is by a relative
- provided the member also occupies the property
- Interpretation of 'unauthorized occupation' includes occupation by relative if member is also in occupation
- Overruling of Sagar Pandurang Dhundare v. Keshav Aaba Patil
Case Details
2018 LawText (BOM) (10) 164
Writ Petition No.2729 of 2018
Shri S.R. Bhongade for petitioner; Mrs Tiwari, AGP for respondent nos. 1, 2 and 4; Shri V.G. Dhage for respondent no.3
Additional Commissioner, Nagpur Division, Nagpur; Additional Collector, Nagpur; Alkatai Dilipji Shastri; Tahsildar, Parseoni; Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Parseoni; Gram Panchayat Pipla
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the order of disqualification of a Gram Panchayat member under Section 14(1)(j-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1958.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought to quash the order of disqualification of respondent no.3 as a member of Gram Panchayat.
Filing Reason
Petitioner challenged the disqualification on the ground that the encroachment was by a relative, not the member herself.
Previous Decisions
Additional Collector, Nagpur disqualified respondent no.3 on 2 August 2017; Additional Commissioner, Nagpur Division upheld the disqualification.
Issues
Whether a Gram Panchayat member is disqualified under Section 14(1)(j-3) when the encroachment is by a relative and not by the member herself?
Whether the earlier view in Sagar Pandurang Dhundare v. Keshav Aaba Patil (2018) that disqualification applies only if the member himself encroaches is still good law?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the encroachment was by a relative of respondent no.3, not by respondent no.3 herself, and therefore, as per Sagar Pandurang Dhundare, disqualification does not apply.
Respondent no.3 and other respondents supported the disqualification, relying on the subsequent three-Judge Bench decision overruling Sagar Pandurang Dhundare.
Ratio Decidendi
The disqualification under Section 14(1)(j-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1958 applies even if the encroachment or unauthorized occupation is made by a relative of the member, provided the member also occupies the same property. The earlier view in Sagar Pandurang Dhundare v. Keshav Aaba Patil (2018) has been overruled by a three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court.
Judgment Excerpts
It was held that the respondent no.3 incurred disqualification as contemplated under Section 14(1)(j-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1958.
Now, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the disqualification would be incurred by the member of the Gram Panchayat, if the encroachment or unauthorized occupation is actually done by the member himself and it was not applicable to a case wherein encroachment or unauthorized occupation was made not by the member of the Gram Panchayat but by some relative of such member...
Now, there is a latest judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court rendered by three Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court, wherein the view taken in Sagar (supra) has been overruled.
Procedural History
The Additional Collector, Nagpur passed an order on 2 August 2017 disqualifying respondent no.3 under Section 14(1)(j-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1958. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Additional Commissioner, Nagpur Division, which was dismissed. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1958: 14(1)(j-3)
