Archana Mohan Jaiswal vs The District Collector Jalna And Others
2026 Latest Caselaw 5393 Bom

Bombay High Court

Archana Mohan Jaiswal vs The District Collector Jalna And Others on 21 May, 2026

2026:BHC-AUG:21961
                                               1 of 2                929-WP.5364.2026



                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                              929 WRIT PETITION NO. 5364 OF 2026

                                    ARCHANA MOHAN JAISWAL
                                              VERSUS
                           THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR JALNA AND OTHERS
                                                 ...
               Mr. Ravindra Vitthal Gore, Advocate for the Petitioner.
               Mr. B. V. Virdhe, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3-State.
               Mr. Vishant P. Kadam, Advocate for Respondent Nos.4 to 10.
                                                 ...

                                       CORAM :          SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.

                                       DATE     :       21st MAY, 2026
                                                        (VACATION COURT)
               P.C.:-

1. Heard learned Advocates for the respective parties.

2. By the present petition, the Petitioner is aggrieved by the

order dated 11.05.2026 passed by the learned District Collector, Jalna

in C.R. No.63/2026, whereby the application under Section 35(3) of

the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1959 came to be dismissed.

3. Having heard learned Advocates for the respective parties

and upon perusal of the impugned order, it reveals that the strength of

the Gram Panchayat was of 9 members amongst which the Petitioner

and one Jayshree Rupesh Jaiswal remain absent on the date of No-

Confidence Motion. All remaining 7 members voted in favour of No-

Confidence Motion. As far as the issue of notice of No-Confidence

Motion is concerned, the learned Collector has given a finding that the 2 of 2 929-WP.5364.2026

Petitioner was not available at her residence at the time of service of

notice. Therefore, notice was affixed at conspicuous part of her

residence and a panchanama of the same was prepared, which

amounted to a proper service. Hence, the contentions of the Petitioner

are devoid of any merit.

4. In view of the above, I do not find any reason to interfere

with the order dated 11.05.2026 passed by the learned District

Collector, Jalna in C.R. No.63/2026.

5. Hence, the present petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

(SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.)

Tauseef