In this writ petition challenging an order removing the petitioner from the post of Sarpanch, the High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Bench at Aurangabad) dismissed the petition as infructuous after the petitioner's counsel conceded the point.
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
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders.
Court’s or Judge’s orders.
WRIT PETITION NO.: 3479 OF 2001
***
1.None present for the Petitioner.
Respondent Nos.2, 4, 6 and 8 to 10 served -
Absent. This petition has been already
dismissed against Respondent Nos. 3, 5 and 7
by the order passed by the Registrar on 5th
April, 2004. Respondent No.1, a private
person, is not present before us. None
appears for the Respondent No.1 despite
service. We have heard learned A.G.P. who
represents Respondent No.2.
2.Petitioner, in this petition, sought
following prayers:
"A)By way of issue of appropriate
writ, order or direction, kindly quash and
set aside the impugned order No.2001/DB/
Desk-II/ZPVP/Appeal-CR/37 dated 30-07-2001
issued by the respondent No.9 Additional
Commissioner, Aurangabad be quashed and
set aside.
B)By way of appropriate writ,
order or direction direct the Respondent
No.9 and 10 to continue the petitioner in
the post of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat
Karnavel, Tq. Mantha, Dist. Jalna for the
remainder tenure."
2
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders.
Court’s or Judge’s orders.
3.The petitioner contended that he belongs
to Banjara community recognised as Vimukt
Jati for reservation purpose in the State of
Maharashtra and treated as "O.B.C." for the
purpose of reservation in the local self
Government bodies in the Panchayati Raj for
elections to village Panchayats, Panchayat
Samiti and Zilla Parishads in the State of
Maharashtra.
4.With the assistance of learned A.G.P. we
have seen the order impugned in this
petition. Order impugned Annexure-B is on
record. It appears that the order is passed
by the Additional Commissioner, Aurangabad.
It was an appeal under section 33 (5) of the
Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958 decided on
30th July, 2001. Respondent No.1 in this
writ petition was Respondent No.1 in Appeal
No.CR-37 (Annexure-B) before the Additional
Commissioner, Aurangabad. We have considered
the provision laid down under section 33 (5)
3
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders.
of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958.
In our view with the passage of time, this
petition has become infructuous. Nothing
survives for adjudication. At this stage,
Advocate Mr. Ingole Patil, who appears for
the Petitioner appears and fairly concedes
that the petition has become infructuous.
5.Writ petition stands dismissed as
infructuous. Rule discharged. No order as
to costs.
[K.U.CHANDIWAL, J.] [S.B.DESHMUKH, J.]
Dated:24/08/2010.
ans/3479
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging an order removing the petitioner from the post of Sarpanch survives for adjudication given the parties' concession.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Respondent No.1
Additional Commissioner, Aurangabad
K.U. Chandiwala
S.B. Deshmukh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court