Arun S/O Vishnu Nayak v. The Collector, Gadchiroli And Another

wp.1804.17 1/2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Writ Petition No.1804 of 2017 Arun s/o Vishnu Nayak vs.

The Collector, Gadchiroli & another =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Shri Tejas Deshpande, Advocate for the Petitioner. Ms. Shamsi Haider, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1. Shri D.M. Kale, Advocate for Respondent No.2.

CORAM

: Z.A. HAQ & S.M. MODAK, JJ.

DATE : 7 th JANUARY, 2020.

Heard.

02] The membership of the petitioner as Gram Panchayat Member came to be terminated as the petitioner failed to submit the caste validity certificate within time as prescribed by Section 9-A of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965. The contention of the petitioner is that the delay in submitting the caste validity certificate was not due to any fault of the petitioner, but was because of the delay on the part of the Scrutiny Committee in issuing the caste validity certificate.

03] The learned A.G.P. and the learned Advocate for respondent No.2 pointed out the

wp.1804.17 2/2 judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shankar s/o Raghunath Devre (Patil) vs. State of Maharashtra & others reported in (2019) 3 SCC 220, in which it is held that the provisions of Section 9-A of the Act of 1965 are mandatory.

04] The learned Advocate for the petitioner has not been able to controvert the legal position. Hence, in view of the proposition of law laid down in the above referred judgment, there is no scope for any interference in the matter.

05] The writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

JUDGE JUDGE *sandesh