← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/11756/2024disposed off

Sana Kausar Aslam Shaikh v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Chief Secretary And Others

2024-10-23Hon'Ble Shri Justice Kishore C. Sant2 pages

2024:BHC-AUG:26349 ( 1 ) {wp11756.24}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 916 WRIT PETITION NO. 11756 OF 2024 SANA KAUSAR ASLAM SHAIKH

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY AND OTHERS Mr.N.Y. Kingaonkar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.S.N. Kendre, AGP for the respondent-State.

CORAM

: KISHORE C. SANT, J.

DATE : 23.10.2024 PC :- 01.

Heard for some time. The challenge in this petition is to an order passed by the Assistant Block Development Officer and Extension Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Khultabad dated 16/26.08.2024. In-fact, there is no order as such, but only enquiry report is submitted to the Dy. Chief Executive Office, Zilla Parishad, Chh. Sambhajinagar. The enquiry was conducted pursuant to order passed by the Dy. Chief Executive Officer (Pan.), Zilla Parishad, Chh.Sambhajinagar dated 15.07.2024, directing the Block Development Officer and the Extension Officer, Panchayat Samiti, to enquire into allegation of the petitioner that the resignation letter was not signed by the petitioner. It was shown that she has tendered resignation. It is case of the petitioner that she has never tendered resignation nor she signed any such resignation. Such

( 2 ) {wp11756.24} letter was given to the Block Development Officer. The learned Block Development Officer is not authorized to accept resignation under the Grampanchayat Act. It is further stated that on the basis of such false resignation, resolution was taken accepting resignation etc. 02.

The petitioner, however, could not address to the Court as to how the enquiry report can be challenged under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, before this Court. Such report cannot be said to be an order or judgment passed by any authority. The remedy of the petitioner lies elsewhere. In view of the same, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition.

03.

The writ petition is dismissed. The petitioner is at liberty to avail any remedy, if provided under law.

[KISHORE C. SANT, J.] snk/2024/oct24/wp11756.24