Bombay High Court
Smt. Durgabai Vinod Rangari vs The Honble State Minister, Rural ... on 22 August, 2017
Bench: S.C. Gupte
wp2700.17.J.odt 1/3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 2700 OF 2017
Smt. Durgabai Vinod Rangari.
Aged : Major, Occ : Sarpanch.
R/o. Gram Panchayat Chilhati,
Tah : Goregaon, District : Gondia. .....PETITIONER
...V E R S U S...
1] The Hon'ble State Minister,
Rural Development, Maharashtra
State Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2] The Additional Commissioner,
Nagpur.
3] The Chief Executive Officer,
Zilla Parishad Gondia.
4] The Block Development Officer,
Panchayat Samiti Goregaon,
Tah : Goregaon, Dist.:Gondia.
5] Shri. Bhushan Budharam Thakur.
R/o. Gram Panchayat Chilhati.
Tah : Goregaon, Dist : Gondia.
6] Smt. Ashabai Rajkumar Thakur.
R/o. Gram Panchayat Chilhati.
Tah : Goregaon, Dist.: Gondia.
7] Nageshwari Chuvanand Thakur.
R/o. Gram Panchayat Chilhati.
Tah : Goregaon, Dist.: Gondia.
::: Uploaded on - 24/08/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2017 01:06:22 :::
wp2700.17.J.odt 2/3
8] Shri. Prakash Gulabchand Patle,
R/o. Gram Panchayat Chilhati,
Tah : Goregaon, Dist.: Gondia.
9] The Gram Panchayat Chilhati,
Tah : Goregaon, Dist.: Gondia.
Through its Secretary. ...... RESPONDENTS.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Shri V. G. Dhage, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mrs. M. A. Barabade, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Shri Abhijit Parihar, Advocate for Respondent Nos.3 and 4.
Shri P. S. Tidke, Advocate for Respondent Nos.5 to 8.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
CORAM : S. C. GUPTE, J.
nd AUGUST, 2017.
DATE : 22
ORAL JUDGMENT :
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
02] Rule.
03] Prima facie the impugned orders of the authorities below
cannot be sustained. The case against the petitioner, who was
Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat Chilhati in District Gondia, was
removed from the post of Sarpanch on the ground of dereliction of
duty. The only case of dereliction duty is appointment of Asha
Swayam Sevika in a monthly meeting of Gram Panchayat, when
the appointment had to be made by a properly convened Gram
Sabha. It so transpires that though initially the appointment was
made in a monthly meeting of Gram Panchayat, subsequently, after
wp2700.17.J.odt 3/3
receipt of a communication in that behalf from in-charge Medical
Officer, a Gram Sabha was duly convened and the appointment
was made by a resolution duly passed by the Gram Sabha. This
aspect of the matter appears to have been completely overlooked
by all authorities below while passing the impugned orders.
Learned counsel for respondent Nos.5 to 8 submits that the
minutes produced are not of Gram Sabha. Secondly, it is submitted
that, at any rate, this particular Gram Sabha meeting was an
adjourned meeting of the earlier Gram Sabha and could not have
considered the resolution of appointment of Asha Swayam Sevika.
That I am afraid is not the basis on which the impugned orders
were passed against the petitioner. None of the authorities below
has considered any difficulty either in the minutes produced by the
petitioner or in passing of the resolution of appointment of Asha
Swayam Sevika in the Gram Sabha on the basis that it was an
adjourned Gram Sabha or otherwise. Accordingly, pending the
hearing and final disposal of the petition an interim injunction in
terms of prayer clause (2) must follow. It is ordered accordingly.
JUDGE
PBP
