Archana Mohan Jaiswal v. The District Collector Jalna And Others

2026:BHC-AUG:21961 1 of 2 929-WP.5364.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 929 WRIT PETITION NO. 5364 OF 2026 ARCHANA MOHAN JAISWAL

VERSUS

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR JALNA AND OTHERS ...

Mr. Ravindra Vitthal Gore, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. B. V. Virdhe, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3-State. Mr. Vishant P. Kadam, Advocate for Respondent Nos.4 to 10. ...

CORAM :

SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.

DATE :

21st MAY, 2026 (VACATION COURT) P.C.:- 1.

Heard learned Advocates for the respective parties. 2.

By the present petition, the Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 11.05.2026 passed by the learned District Collector, Jalna in C.R. No.63/2026, whereby the application under Section 35(3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1959 came to be dismissed. 3.

Having heard learned Advocates for the respective parties and upon perusal of the impugned order, it reveals that the strength of the Gram Panchayat was of 9 members amongst which the Petitioner and one Jayshree Rupesh Jaiswal remain absent on the date of NoConfidence Motion. All remaining 7 members voted in favour of NoConfidence Motion. As far as the issue of notice of No-Confidence Motion is concerned, the learned Collector has given a finding that the

2 of 2 929-WP.5364.2026 Petitioner was not available at her residence at the time of service of notice. Therefore, notice was affixed at conspicuous part of her residence and a panchanama of the same was prepared, which amounted to a proper service. Hence, the contentions of the Petitioner are devoid of any merit.

4.

In view of the above, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order dated 11.05.2026 passed by the learned District Collector, Jalna in C.R. No.63/2026.

5.

Hence, the present petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. (SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.) Tauseef