Bhausaheb Limbaji Devkar v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

1 972-wp 2198-2021.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2198 OF 2021 Bhausaheb Limbaji Devkar .. Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents Mr. Panditrao S. Anerao, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. D. R. Kale, I/c. G. P. for Respondents-State. Mr. A. B. Kadethankar, Advocate for Respondent No. 3. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA & SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.

DATED : 03rd February, 2021.

PER COURT:- .

Mr. Anerao, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is elected as a member of village Grampanchayat Bhalgaon, Taluka and District Aurangabad from general category. The post of Sarpanch is reserved for OBC (female) category. The learned counsel submits that, in fact, the same ought to have been reserved for general category. The reservation has not been properly applied. The rotation policy is not adhered to.

2.

We have heard Mr. Kale, learned in-charge Government Pleader for State and Mr. Kadethankar, learned counsel for respondent No. 3.

2 972-wp 2198-2021.odt 3.

It is not disputed that 1995 is considered as the first year. 4.

It is also not disputed that in the year 1995 the post of Sarpanch of village Bhalgaon was reserved for OBC category. In 2000, it was reserved for general category. In 2005 and 2010, it was reserved for general (women) category and in 2015, it was reserved for SC category. Now, it is reserved for OBC (female) category. For general category the post of Sarpanch was reserved in 2000. In 2005 and 2010 the same was reserved for general (women) category.

5.

We do not find that the rotation policy is breached in any manner as far as village Bhalgaon is concerned. 6.

In view of that, writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ( SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI ) ( S. V. GANGAPURWALA ) JUDGE JUDGE P.S.B.