Petitioner challenged the validity of a no confidence motion passed against him by local body members. The Court found the motion valid based on separate discussions on charges and correct procedure, dismissing the writ petition.
Writ petition dismissed with no order as to costs.
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.
wp589-13.order
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
Writ Petition No. 589 of 2013
Gajanan Vishnu Shere
Vs.
The Addl. Collector, Buldhana 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. N.B. Kalwaghe, counsel for petitioner. Mrs. K. Deshpande, AGP for respondent nos. 1 to 3.
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : 4 th February, 2013.
Heard.
By this petition, the petitioner impugns an order passed by the Additional Collector on 16.1.2013, dismissing an application filed by the petitioner and holding that the no confidence motion passed against the petitioner on 11.9.2012 was legal and valid.
The petitioner had challenged the no confidence motion on two grounds. According to the petitioner, though the non confidence motion was sought to be passed against the Sarpanch as well as Up-Sarpanch and two separate notices were issued to the members, separate discussion in regard to the charges levelled against the Sarpanch and UpSarpanch was not conducted. It is submitted that it was necessary to have the discussion on the charges levelled against the Sarpanch and Up-Sarpanch separately.
It is then submitted that though two of the members were not present at the meeting from the very beginning, they were permitted to vote in the meeting in favour of the motion and the said permission to vote has vitiated the proceedings. According to the petitioner, this
wp589-13.order
aspect has not been considered by the Additional Collector, though a ground has been raised in this behalf.
On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a perusal of the impugned order it appears that there is no force in both the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner. On a perusal of the minutes of the meeting it is clear that discussion was carried out separately in regard to the separate charges levelled against the Sarpanch and the Up-Sarpanch. After the meeting commenced, the discussion in regard to the charges levelled against the Sarpanch was made. Later on, the allegations levelled against the UpSarpanch were discussed. If that was so, the first submission made on behalf of the petitioner is liable to be rejected.
The other submission made on behalf of the petitioner is an afterthought. On a perusal of the minutes of the meeting, it is clear that an objection in regard to the late entry of two of the members in the special meeting was not raised by the petitioner at all. For the first time, the said objection was raised before the Additional Collector. On a perusal of the minutes of the meeting, it appears that all the members were present in the meeting right from the beginning. The objection appears to be an afterthought and a lame attempt to set aside the no confidence motion which is validly passed against the petitioner by two-third majority.
Since there is no merit in the writ petition, the same is dismissed with no order as to costs.
JUDGE
Hirekhan
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the no confidence motion against the petitioner was validly passed despite alleged procedural irregularities.
Whether separate discussions on charges against the Sarpanch and Up-Sarpanch were conducted as required.
Gajanan Vishnu Shere
Addl. Collector, Buldhana
others
Vasanti A. Naik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
