Shri. Janardan Dundu Mate v. Shri. Raghunath Tukaram Pandhare And ORS

505. WP-4909.19 Tandle

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4909 of 2019 Shri Janardan Dundu Mate ... Petitioner

Versus

Shri Raghunath Tukaram Pandhare and Ors.

... Respondents . . . . . .

Mr. D. S. Pagare, Advocae for Petitioner.

Mr. Y. D. Patil, AGP for Respondent Nos. 7 & 8. . . . . . .

CORAM : S. S. SHINDE, J.

DATE : 12TH APRIL, 2019 P. C. :

Not on board. On mentioning, taken on production board.

2.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the post of Sarpanch for the village Panchayat at Kharivali, Tq. Bhiwandi, Dist. Thane is reserved for women and therefore in view of the mandate of third proviso to Sub-section 3 of Section 35 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, no confidence motion is to be carried out. In that case, such a no confidence motion shall be carried out only by majority of not less than 3⁄4th of total number of members. For the time being, entitled to sit and vote at any meeting

505. WP-4909.19 of the Panchayat. Therefore learned counsel submits that since the post of Sarpanch of aforesaid village was reserved for candidates from the women category, the resolution passed by the members of the Panchayat, thereby passing the no confidence motion by 2/3 majority was not in accordance with mandate of aforesaid provisions and therefore the petition deserves consideration. 3.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned AGP appearing for the Respondent/State. On perusal of the order passed by the Additional Collector, Thane on 28th February 2019, it is crystal clear that the post of the Sarpanch of said village has been reserved for SC/ST category and not for women category. Admittedly, no confidence motion carried out against the petitioner was by two third (2/3) majority as required under Sub-section 3 of Section 35 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act.

4.

In that view of the matter, no case is made out to interfere the impugned order. Hence, writ petition stands rejected. (S. S. SHINDE, J.)