Bombay High Court
Deepak Narayan Bagate vs State Of Maharashtra Thr ... on 4 September, 2023
Bench: G.S. Patel, Kamal Khata
2023:BHC-AS:25706 963-ASWP-5555-2023.DOC
Talwalkar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 5555 OF 2023
Deepak Narayan Bagate ...Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors ...Respondents
Mr Jayendra Khairnar, with Shraddha Kadam, for the Petitioner.
Mr SL Babar, AGP, for Respondent Nos 1 to 3-State.
Mr Sanjiv Sawant, with Abhishek Deshmukh & Digvijay Palande, for
the Respondent No. 5.
CORAM G.S. Patel &
Kamal Khata, JJ.
DATED: 4th September 2023
PC:-
1. This Petition raises a serious disputed question of fact as to
the title regarding the very basis of the Petition apart from the fact
there is no infirmity demonstrated in regard to the impugned order
dated 28 October 2022 passed by the Additional Commissioner,
Pune Division, Pune in Gram Panchayat Appeal No. 26 of 2022. By
that order, the Additional Commissioner correctly rejected the
appeal filed by the Petitioner against the judgment and order of 23rd
July 2022 of the District Collector, Pune in Gram Panchayat
Dispute Application No. 105 of 2021.
4th September
963-ASWP-5555-2023.DOC
2. In our view, that whole Gram Panchayat Application was
probably mischievous and was almost certainly misconceived. This
is clear from paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of the present Petition itself
which read as follows::
4) The Petitioner further states that as per the
provisions of Section 14(1)(g) of the said Act, no person
shall be member of panchayat and continue as such, who
has directly or indirectly, by himself or his partner, any
share of interest in any work done by order of the panchayat
or in any contract with, by or on behalf of, or employment
with or under the panchayat. It would not be out of place
to mention here that admittedly the Respondent No. 5 is
running a shop of hardware and building material, who
supplied material for village panchayat work.
5) The Petitioner further states that the gram
panchayat Plot No 815 property No. 602/8, is in the
name of mother of the Respondent No. 5 Nanda Shivaji
Wable, without any title and valid documents in relation
of the same and have encroached on the property of
Gram Panchayat. The Respondent No. 5 has cheated by
not mentioning the same in his affidavit of nomination at
the time of election.
6) The Petitioner further states that the shop viz.
"Shri. Samarth Sales Corporation and Hardware
Material" is owned by the Respondent No. 5 and his
father Mr. Shivaji Wable and they collect the goods and
services taxes on the good sold from the said shop and
have mentioned it as nothing in the declaration form.
They are also cheating the state government by evading
taxes. The Respondent No.5 as a member of gram
panchayat has secured his personal interest in the property
of Gram panchayat and misused his position.
(Emphasis added)
4th September
963-ASWP-5555-2023.DOC
3. It is therefore not an admitted position that the property in
question is in fact Gram Panchayat property. The entire Petition
appears prima facie to be a private dispute. The invocation of
Section 14(1)(j-3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959
is completely erroneous and misconceived.
4. There is no substance to the Petition. The Petition is rejected.
There will be no order as to costs.
(Kamal Khata, J) (G. S. Patel, J)
4th September
