High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a Collector's order regarding ward division and reservation seats under the Mumbai Grampanchayat Act, 1958, finding no illegality.
The writ petition was dismissed as misconceived.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 7719 OF 2008
DIST.: PUNE
Rajabhau Laxman Wagh ...Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...Respondents.
Mr. Ramesh Dubey Patil i/by M/s. Jay & Co. for the Petitioner Mrs. M.P. Thakur, Assistant Government Pleader, for the State.
CORAM : B ILAL NAZKI and J.H. BHATIA, JJ. DATE : NOVEMBER 26, 2008
P.C. :-
The petitioner is aggrieved of an order passed by the Collector under Section 10(1)(2) of the Mumbai Grampanchayat Act, 1958 and Rules 4 and 5 of the Mumbai Grampanchayat (to make division of Ward of Village and to keep Reservation Seat for Woman, Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe) Rules, 1966.
2
considered and rejected. The petitioner attacked the order mainly on the ground that the two wards concerned did not have the equivalent number of population; that the Census of 2001 was taken into consideration; and that no survey was done. 2001 Census is the latest Census available with the State, and, therefore, there could not be better data than the Census of 2001.
BILAL NAZKI, J.
J.H. BHATIA, J.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order passed by the Collector under Section 10(1)(2) of the Mumbai Grampanchayat Act, 1958 and Rules 4 and 5 of the Mumbai Grampanchayat Rules, 1966 amounts to illegality.
Whether the petitioner's objections regarding population equivalence and lack of survey justify quashing the order.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Rajabhau Laxman Wagh
The State of Maharashtra
Bilal Nazki
J.H. Bhatia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
