Sau. Vaishali W/O Prabhakar ... vs The State Of Maha. Thr. Secretary, ...

Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 9077 Bom
Judgement Date : 27 November, 2017

Bombay High Court
Sau. Vaishali W/O Prabhakar ... vs The State Of Maha. Thr. Secretary, ... on 27 November, 2017
Bench: Z.A. Haq
  wp5695of2017.doc                                                                                   1/4

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT
               BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
                                    Writ Petition No. 5695 of 2017

  Petitioner :-                               Sou. Vaishali w/o Prabhakar Karhade,
                                              Aged about 28 years, 
                                              Member, Panchayat Samiti,
                                              Chikhli-443201,
                                              Taluka Chikhli, Dist. Buldhana.

                                                               versus

  Respondents                         1)  The State of Maharashtra, 
                                          Through the Secretary, Rural Development 
                                          Department, 25, Murzban Road, Fort, 
                                          Mumbai-400 001.

                                      2) Sou. Pankaja Munde, 
                                         Hon'ble Minister of State for Rural 
                                         Development, Mantralaya, Mumbai-400 032.

                                      3) The Divisional Commissioner, Amravati 
                                         Division, Amravati.

                                      4) The Collector, Buldhana,
                                         Tah. and District-Buldhana.

                                      5) The Returning Officer for the Elections of 
                                         Panchayat Samiti, Chikhli and Tahsildar, 
                                         Chikhli-443201, Tq. Chikhli, Dist. Buldhana.

                                      6) Jitendra Kanhayyalal Kalantri,
                                         Age 43 year, R/o Undri, Tq. Chikhli, 
                                         Dist. Buldhana.

                                                                                       
  Shri M.V. Samarth, Advocate for Petitioner.
  Shri O.D. Kakade, Adv. for Respondent No.6.
  Ms. K.R.Deshpande, A.G.P. for the State/Respondent Nos. 1,3, 4 and 5 State. 
  _______________________________________________________________________________




::: Uploaded on - 30/11/2017                                            ::: Downloaded on - 01/12/2017 01:26:17 :::
   wp5695of2017.doc                                                                           2/4



                                              CORAM: Z.A. Haq, J.
                                              DATED:  27.11.2017.
  Oral Judgment


  1.                    Though   served,   there   is   no  appearance   on   behalf   of   the 

  respondent No. 2. 



  2.                    The petitioner has challenged the interim order passed by 

  the   Hon'ble   Minister   granting   stay   to   the   effect,   operation   and 

  implementation of the order passed by the Divisional Commissioner, 

  Amravati. The Divisional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati 

  allowed the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 68-A of the 

  Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961 and set 

  aside   the   election   for   the   post   of   Deputy   Chairman   of   Panchayat 

  Samittee held on 14/03/2017. 



  3.                    The   Grievance   of   the   petitioner   is   that   though   the 

  petitioner had filed caveat application before the State Government, 

  she was neither given any notice nor she was heard before interim 

  order is granted by the Hon'ble Minister. Looking to the nature of the 




::: Uploaded on - 30/11/2017                                    ::: Downloaded on - 01/12/2017 01:26:17 :::
   wp5695of2017.doc                                                                                  3/4

  controversy, the petition is taken up for hearing.  



  4.                    Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. 



  5.                    As   the   interim   order   granted   by   Hon'ble   Minister   is 

  operating   since   August   2017,   without   delivering   into   merits   of 

  challenges raised in the petition, in my view, the interests of justice 

  would be sub-served by passing the following order: 


                                                               ORDER

1. The State Government/Hon'ble Minister before whom the appeal filed by the respondent No.6 (Jitendra Kanhayyalal Kalantri) is pending, shall dispose it till 19/12/2017.

2. The interim order granted by the Hon'ble Minister shall continue to operate till disposal of the appeal.

3. The learned A.G.P.shall communicate this order immediately to the respondent No. 1 so that steps for ::: Uploaded on - 30/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 01/12/2017 01:26:17 ::: wp5695of2017.doc 4/4 fixing the matter for hearing can be taken immediately.

4. The Respondent No.6 and the representative of respondent nos. 3 to 5, if they desire, shall appear before the Hon'ble Minister or the Authority which will be taking up the appeal for hearing, on 08/12/2017 at 11.00 a.m. and abide by further instruction in the matter.

Rule is made absolute in the above terms. In the circumstances, parties to bear their own costs.

JUDGE nandurkar ::: Uploaded on - 30/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 01/12/2017 01:26:17 :::