← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/1291/2024dismissed

Sau. Rekha Suresh Chavhan v. The Additional Commissioner, Amravati And ORS.

2025-08-07Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sachin S. Deshmukh2 pages

1 20-1291-24.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.1291/2024 Sau. Rekha Suresh Chavhan Vs. The Additional Commissioner, Amravati and others Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr. S.D. Khati, Advocate for Petitioner Mrs. Prachi Joshi,AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 Mr. P.M. Dahake, Advocate for Respondent No.3 Mr. Abhijit B. Kuradkar, Advocate for Respondent No.4 CORAM: SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.

DATED : 7th AUGUST, 2025 1.

Heard.

2.

The petitioner was elected as a Sarpanch of the Grampanchayat. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner been disqualified for non-payment of tax raised by the Grampanchayat. The said contention of the complainant is supported by the Secretary of the Grampanchayat, who has filed a detailed reply stating that a demand was presented to the petitioner herein and the same has been accepted by the Collector, visa-vis, the Additional Collector. It is contention of the counsel for the petitioner that there is variance between the two demand bills presented on the record. However, the fact remains that the demand was raised on 30.06.2022 and failure on the part of the petitioner to pay the same within a period of three months entails disqualification under Section 14(1)

2 20-1291-24.odt (h) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1958. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment in the case of Shaukat Ali Mohd. Hussain Vs. Shaikh Ayub S/o Sk. Haji Sk. Ahmed and others, reported in 2014(4) Mh.L.J. 658, facts in the aforesaid case mentioned (supra), are distinguishable as therein no material was on record to show that the demand was ever presented to the petitioner. In the present case admittedly, report of the Secretary establishes that demand bill was presented to the petitioner and same is not cleared within period of three months. Resultantly, no interference is warranted in the present petition. The petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

(SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.) MP Deshpande Signed by: Mr. M.P. Deshpande Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 12/08/2025 10:12:39