Jeetu Eknath Makasare v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

933-wp-3009-21

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3009 OF 2021 Jeetu S/o Eknath Makasare ... Petitioner.

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and others.

... Respondents.

....

Mr. A.R. Salve, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Mr. A.R. Kale, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4. Mr. A.B. Kadethankar, Advocate for Respondent No.2. ....

CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA AND SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.

DATE : 16th FEBRUARY, 2021 PER COURT:- 1.

Mr. Salve, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Grampanchayat of Sarve at no point of time has got the post of Sarpanch from S.C. category. Since 1995, the post of Sarpanch is never reserved for S.C category. The learned counsel submits that the population of S.C. in the said Grampanchayat is almost 10%, still the post of Sarpanch is not reserved for S.C. category. 2.

We have heard the learned A.G.P. and Mr. Kadethankar, learned counsel for respondent No. 2.

933-wp-3009-21 3.

It appears that only four posts are reserved for Sarpanch from S.C. out of the total Grampanchayats in the Taluka. There are total 86 Grampanchayats. The descending order has to be considered. The Grampanchayats where the post of Sarpanch are reserved for S.C., were never reserved for S.C. in the elections since 1995. 4.

Considering the above, at this stage, no interference is called for.

5.

The writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

( SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI ) ( S.V. GANGAPURWALA ) JUDGE JUDGE S.P. Rane