Anita Sachin Patil vs The Collector,Kolhapur And Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 12240 Bom

                                                                   20. wp 4859-21.doc

DDR
              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                       WRIT PETITION NO. 4859 OF 2021

      ANITA SACHIN PATIL                                  ..PETITIONER
            VS.
      THE COLLECTOR, KOLHAPUR & ORS.                      ..RESPONDENTS
                                  --------------------
      Mr. P.M. Arjunwadkar for the petitioner.
      Mr. S.D. Rayrikar, AGP for the State.
                                  --------------------

                                 CORAM :        M.S.KARNIK, J.

                                 DATE       :   AUGUST 31, 2021


      P.C.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that

the notice of no confdence motion moved against the petitioner -

Sarpanch is contrary to the provisions of the Maharashtra Village

Panchayat Act, 1958. He submits that the procedure is not

followed. According to him, no opportunity of presenting views of

the petitioner has been granted in the meeting.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there has

been complete non observance of the procedure prescribed by the

Bombay Village Panchayat (Meeting) Rules, 1959. Learned counsel

for the petitioner placed reliance on the decisions of this Court in

the case of Vijay Ramchandra Katkar vs. Group Gram

1 Of 2

20. wp 4859-21.doc

Panchayat Pali, District Raigad & others1 and Full Bench

judgment of this Court in the case of Shri Viswas Pandurang

Mokal vs. Group Gram Panchayat Shihu & others2.

4. I have gone through the Memo of the Petition, annexures and

the impugned order. The resolution is passed in a meeting held by

the Tahsildar. In the said meeting as many as nine out of 10

members have voted in favour of the no confdence motion. The

resolution was passed by the requisite majority. The proceedings

record that an opportunity to the petitioner to present her views is

given.

5. Having gone through the order passed by the Collector, I am

of the opinion that there is substantial compliance with the

procedure while passing motion of no confdence which is by

Digitally majority of 9:1. The decisions relied upon by the petitioner will signed by DIKSHA DIKSHA DINESH DINESH RANE Date:

have no application in these facts. Considering the cogent reasons, RANE 2021.08.31 19:32:47 +0530 recorded by the Collector, I see no reason to interfere with the

impugned order passed. The Writ Petition is dismissed.

                                                                       (M.S.KARNIK, J.)




                      1    2010(4) ALL MR 707
                      2    2011(3) ALL MR 778

                                                                                            2 Of 2