Shashikala Pandhrinath Chandnashiv v. The District Collector And Others

2026:BHC-AUG:15807

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 1922 OF 2026 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3882/2026 Smt. Shashikala Pandhrinath Chandnashiv, Age: 75 years, Occu: Household, Ro Savargaon Ghat, Tal. Ashti, Dist. Beed.

...Petitioner

Versus

1.

The District Collector, Collector Office, Beed 2.

The Preceding Officer @ Tahsildar, Ashti, Dist. Beed 3.

Shri Dattu Ghodke, Age: 50 years, Occu: Service, presently working as Gramsevak.

Gram Panchayat Savargaon Ghat, Tal. Ashti, Dist. Beed 4.

Shri Arjun Shamrao Mhaske, Age: 60 years, Occu: Agri, Member of Gram Panchayat Savargaon Ghat, Tal. Ashti, Dist. Beed 5.

Shri Bhadrinath Ravasahab Mhaske.

Age: 45 years. Occu: Agri.

Gram Panchayat Member, Savargaon Ghat, Tal. Ashti. Dist. Beed 6.

Smt. Anita Amol Mhaske, Age: 42 years, Occu: Gram Panchayat Member, Savargaon Ghat, Tal. Ashti, Dist. Beed 7.

Shri Dnyaneshwar Namdev Gaykhe, Age: 35 years, Occu: Agri, Gram Panchayat Member, Savargaon Ghat, Tal. Ashti, Dist. Beed 8.

Smt. Rohini Dattatray Mhaske.

Age: 36 years, Occu: Agri, Gram Panchayat Member, Savargaon Ghat,

Tal. Ashti. Dist. Beed 9.

Smt. Jijabai Ashok Bhagat, Age: 35 years, Occu: Agri.

Gram Panchayat Member. Savargaon Ghat, Tal. Ashti, Dist. Beed 10.

Shri Shashikant Shivaji Chandanshiv, Age: 39 years, Occu: Agri.

Gram Panchayat Member, Savargaon Ghat, Tal. Ashti, Dist. Beed 11.

Smt. Kasabai Mohan Thengal, Age: 60 years, Occu: Agri, Gram Panchayat Member, Savargaon Ghat, Tal. Ashti, Dist. Beed 12.

Smt. Shilabai Bhausaheb Barate, Age: 32 years, Occu: Agri, Gram Panchayat Member, Savargaon Ghat, Tal. Ashti, Dist. Beed

...Respondents

*** • Mr. Y. V. Kakde, Advocate for the Petitioner • Mr. S. K.. Shirse, AGP for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2/State • Mr. A. S. Kakade, Advocate for the Respondent Nos. 4, 5 to 9 & 11 & ***

CORAM

: S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J DATE : APRIL 06, 2026 ORDER :

1.

Petitioner takes exception to the order dated 20.12.2025 passed by District Collector in Appeal No.

JA.KR.2025/GB/DESK-2/GRPNI/APPEAL PR.KR.17/2025/KAVI and seeks to set aside the motion of no confidence passed against her. 2.

The petitioner came to be directly elected on the post of Sarpanch of Village Panchayat, Savargaon Ghat, Tal. Ashti, Dist. Beed.

On 06.05.2025, motion of no confidence was moved by members of village panchayat against her. Eventually, on 09.05.2025 a special meeting was convened to discuss the no confidence motion. On 09.05.2025, it is declared that no confidence motion is passed against Petitioner. Petitioner disputed no confidence motion before District Collector who rejected the Appeal by impugned order. 3.

Learned Advocate appearing for Petitioner, submits that Petitioner was not duly served with notice of no confidence motion. She was hospitalized on the day when notice to discuss no confidence motion was held. In absence of service of notice of special meeting to Petitioner, no confidence motion is declared to be validly passed. District Collector did not consider the aforesaid aspect but relying upon so called panchnama, regarding service of notice on daughter-in-law of Petitioner, uphold no confidence motion passed against Petitioner. 4.

Learned Advocates appearing for Respondents supports impugned order.

5.

Having considered submissions advanced, it can be observed that requisition of no confidence motion was moved by all members of village panchayat. The record indicates that notice of special meeting of no confidence motion was issued by Tahsildar on 06.05.2025. The

proceedings shows that Petitioner had refused to accept notice. The notice was read over to her. Thereafter, notice was handed over to Sau. Vaishali Chandanshiv i.e. daughter-in-law of Petitioner. However, when she returned, it was affixed on the door of the house. Panchnama is drawn by Village Development Officer in presence of five panchas. A photograph showing that notice was affixed on the front door of her house is also part of the record. Similarly, panchnama dated 06.05.2025 depict that notice of no confidence motion was affixed on the notice board at Tahsildar's Office. Although Petitioner has placed medical record showing that on 09.05.2025 she attended hospital, however, the fact remains that notice of no confidence motion was duly served upon her on 07.05.2025.

6.

Learned Advocate appearing for Petitioner endeavours to contend that Petitioner's son and daughter-in-law are residing at different address, therefore, service upon daughter-in-law cannot be considered as valid service. Pertinently, Petitioner has not denied that the signature on notice is that of her daughter-in-law. The panchnama clearly records that when Petitioner refused to accept notice, it was given in hand of daughter-in-law. There is nothing on record to show that place where notice was affixed is different than the house of Petitioner. The District Collector has considered all aforesaid aspects

and found that there was valid service of notice. The proceedings of no confidence motion shows that all members of village panchayat unanimously passed resolution of no confidence against Petitioner. Resolution is passed with majority of 9:0. Apparently, Petitioner lost confidence of members, eventually, no confidence motion is passed against her.

7.

This Court do not find any infirmity in the proceedings of no confidence motion or reasoning recorded by District Collector in impugned order. In result, Writ Petition stands dismissed. 8.

In view of disposal of Writ Petition, pending Civil Application stands disposed of.

(S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.) Umesh