Bombay High Court
Rakesh Baban Nannavare vs The State Of Maharashtra Through Its ... on 4 September, 2024
2024:BHC-AUG:20750
950-WP-1921-2024.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 1921 OF 2024
Rakesh Baban Nannavare
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Principal
Secretary And Others
***
• Mr. J. V. Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner
• Mr. R. K. Ingole, AGP for the Respondent Nos. 1 to
3/State
• Mr. R. D. Gaikwad, Advocate for Respondent No. 4
***
CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT, J
DATE : SEPTEMBER 04, 2024
PER COURT :
1. Heard parties.
2. A short issue involved in the Petition is in
respect of order of remand passed by the learned
Additional Commissioner, Nashik Division, Nashik in
Grampanchayat Appeal No. 05/2022 dated 08.09.2022.
Learned Commissioner has remanded the Dispute
application no. 45/2022 filed by the present Petitioner
before the Collector, Jalgaon.
3. It is the case of the Petitioner that
Umesh PAGE 1 of 4
950-WP-1921-2024.odt
Respondent No. 4 has incurred disqualification under
Section 14(j-1) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat
Act, 1958 (for short 'the Act') as he is having more
than 2 children on the date of filing of the nomination
to the post of Member Grampanchayat, village Bambhori,
Tq. Dharangaon, Dist. Jalgaon. Collector has dismissed
the dispute stating that the document i.e., birth
certificate of third child was produced before the
Collector after application was closed for order and
thus, Respondent No. 4 could not get proper opportunity
to counter the said document.
4. The said order of Collector came to be
challenged by the Petitioner before the Commissioner.
Learned Commissioner also considered that there is
report of Block Development Officer stating that
Respondent No. 4 is having three living children and
one died and thus, total four children. However,
considering the reasoning of the Collector so far as
birth certificate that was produced after the matter
was closed for hearing, it is held that in view of the
fresh evidence it was necessary to give hearing to the
Umesh PAGE 2 of 4
950-WP-1921-2024.odt
parties by the Collector and remanded the matter.
5. Learned Advocate for the Petitioner vehemently
argued that the document is only birth certificate of
daughter of Respondent No. 4, namely, Komal. Looking to
the nature of proceeding being summary proceedings, no
evidence as such is required in the nature of retrial.
The document can be considered even by the Commissioner
by applying principal under Section 27 of the Act. No
evidence in the nature of oral evidence is required but
it is only a birth certificate which can be considered
by the Commissioner himself. He relied upon the
judgment in case of Arvind Kumar Jaiswal (D) thr. LR
vs. Devendra Prasad Jaiswal Varun, 2023 Live Law (SC)
112.
6. Learned Counsels for respective Respondents
vehemently opposed the Petition.
7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment of
Arvind Kumar has held that the order of remand prolongs
and delays the litigation. It is held that the
Appellate Court should not pass order of remand unless
Umesh PAGE 3 of 4
950-WP-1921-2024.odt
it is found that retrial is required or the material on
record is not sufficient to dispose of the matter for
reasons like lack of adequate opportunity of leading
evidence to a party. In the present case, this Court
find that the document which is produced by the
Petitioner can be considered even by the Commissioner
and for that purpose no retrial is required and no
evidence is required to be taken of any of the parties
since the evidence is in the nature of document. The
Respondent can object and file any other document to
deny the fact of the birth certificate which is brought
on record. Thus, this Court finds that this Petition
can be disposed of by directing the learned
Commissioner to decide the Appeal on merits without
remanding the same to the Collector.
8. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed
of with a direction to learned Commissioner to decide
the Grampanchayat Appeal No. 05/2022 on merits as early
as possible and in any case before 31.12.2024.
(KISHORE C. SANT, J.)
Umesh PAGE 4 of 4
