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
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
