Bombay High Court
Shri Shivaji Nivrutti Bhanvase vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 27 April, 2016
Bench: R.M. Savant
(905)-WP-5061-16 & group matters.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.5061 OF 2016
Sau. Alka Shivaji Bhanvase ]
Age: 51 years, Occ: Agriculturist, ]
R/At Adhegaon, Taluka Mohal, ]
District Solapur ].. Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
ig ]
Mantralaya, Mumbai-400 032. ]
2. Additional Commissioner, Pune ]
Pune Division, at Pune. ]
3. The Collector of Solapur ]
Having office at District Collector Office ]
Solapur, Dist-Solapur. ]
4. The Tahsildar, ]
Mohal, Taluka Mohal, District Solapur. ]
5. The Election Officer, ]
Adhegaon Village, Tal- Mohal, ]
District Solapur. ].. Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.5071 OF 2016
Shri. Laxman Apparao Sutkar ]
BGP. 1 of 5
::: Uploaded on - 29/04/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 23:57:38 :::
(905)-WP-5061-16 & group matters.doc
Age: Adult, Occu: Agriculturist, ]
R/At Adhegaon, Taluka Mohal, ]
District Solapur ].. Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra ]
Mantralaya, Mumbai-400 032. ]
2. Additional Commissioner, Pune ]
Pune Division, at Pune. ig ]
3. The Collector of Solapur ]
Having office at District Collector Office ]
Solapur, Dist-Solapur. ]
4. The Tahsildar, ]
Mohal, Taluka Mohal, District Solapur. ]
5. The Election Officer, ]
Adhegaon Village, Tal- Mohal, ]
District Solapur. ].. Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.4890 OF 2016
Shri. Shivaji Nivrutti Bhanvase ]
Age: 55 years, Occu: Agriculturist, Advocate, ]
R/At Adhegaon, Taluka Mohal, ]
District Solapur ].. Petitioner
Versus
BGP. 2 of 5
::: Uploaded on - 29/04/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 23:57:38 :::
(905)-WP-5061-16 & group matters.doc
1. The State of Maharashtra ]
Mantralaya, Mumbai-400 032. ]
2. Additional Commissioner, Pune ]
Pune Division, at Pune. ]
3. The Collector of Solapur ]
Having office at District Collector Office ]
Solapur, Dist-Solapur. ]
4. The Tahsildar,
ig ]
Mohal, Taluka Mohal, District Solapur. ]
5. The Election Officer, ]
Adhegaon Village, Tal- Mohal, ]
District Solapur. ].. Respondents
Mr. S. S. Raut, for the Petitioner in all Petitions.
Mrs. V. S. Nimbalkar, AGP for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4.
CORAM : R.M. SAVANT, J.
DATE : 27th APRIL 2016
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Rule in each of the above Petitions considering the challenge
raised in the above Petitions made returnable forthwith and heard.
2. The writ jurisdiction of this Court is invoked against the
BGP. 3 of 5
(905)-WP-5061-16 & group matters.doc
orders dated 09.03.2016 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Pune
Division, Pune, by which orders the application for stay filed by the
Petitioners in each of the above Petitions pending their Appeals came to be
rejected.
3. It is not necessary to burden this order with unnecessary
details. Suffice it would be to state that the Petitioners in the above
Petitions have been elected as members of the Gram Panchayat Adhegaon,
Taluka Mohol, District Solapur. They have been elected un-opposed.
Proceedings came to be initiated against the Petitioners under Section 14B
of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act for disqualifying the Petitioners
on the ground that they have not submitted an account of the election
expenses. It seems that on notice being served upon the Petitioners, the
Petitioners filed their reply along with the account of the election
expenses. The Collector however did not countenance the said submission
of the account of the election expenses and by order dated 08.02.2016
allowed the application and disqualified the Petitioners as also disqualified
them from contesting the election for a further period of five years.
4. The said order dated 08.02.2016 was taken exception to by
the Petitioners before the Additional Commissioner under Section 16 of
the said Act. In the said Appeals, the Petitioners filed an application for
BGP. 4 of 5
(905)-WP-5061-16 & group matters.doc
stay which has been rejected by the Additional Commissioner by the
impugned orders all dated 09.03.2016.
5. The said Applications have been rejected as the impugned
order discloses on the ground that in view of the observations made by the
Collector in paragraph 7, stay could not be granted to the Petitioners. In
the said context, it is required to be noted that the Petitioners have been
elected un-opposed as members of the Gram Panchayat Adhegaon in the
year 2005 and have been disqualified on the ground that they have not
submitted their election expenses.
6. In my view, it is just and proper to grant stay to the order
dated 08.02.2016 passed by the Collector Solapur pending the Appeal
before the Additional Commissioner. The impugned orders all dated
09.03.2016 would accordingly stand quashed and set aside. The stay
applications filed by the Petitioners would stand allowed. Resultantly, the
orders passed by the Collector Solapur dated 08.02.2016 would stand
stayed pending the Appeals. The Additional Commissioner is directed to
decide the Appeals expeditiously by giving proper opportunity to the
parties. The Petitions are allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule is
accordingly made absolute with parties to bear their respective costs.
[R.M. SAVANT, J]
BGP. 5 of 5
