The Court rejected a writ petition filed by an elected Sarpanch challenging a no-confidence motion. The Court held that the issue was settled by a Full Bench judgment and allowed authorities to proceed with the election.
Writ petition rejected with no order as to costs; authorities at liberty to proceed with the election.
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) W.P. No.4341/2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.4341 OF 2013
Bhagubai Gangadhar Kashte
..PETITIONER
VERSUS
The Additional Collector, Parbhani & ors.
..RESPONDENTS
Mr Mahesh P. Kale, Advocate for petitioner; Mr S.K. Tambe, A.G.P. for respondents no.1 & 2; Mr S.J. Salunke, Advocate for respondents no.3 to 7
CORAM : N.W. SAMBRE, J. DATE : 8th January, 2015
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner, who is an elected Sarpanch of Village Panchayat Kajali (Rohina), Tq. Selu, Dist. Parbhani, suffered no confidence motion, which was subject to an appeal before the Additional Collector, Parbhani, which appeal came to be dismissed on 6th March, 2013.
(2) W.P. No.4341/2013
Full Bench of this Court in the matter of Tatyasaheb Ramchandra Kale vs. Navnath Tukaram Kakade & ors ., reported in 2014 (6) Mh. L.J. 804 .
(N.W. SAMBRE, J.)
amj
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the provisions of Rule 17 of the Bombay Village Panchayats (Meeting) Rules 1959 are mandatory in nature.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Tatyasaheb Ramchandra Kale vs. Navnath Tukaram Kakade & orsFollowed¶4
2014 (6) Mh. L.J. 804 · Who else cites this
Bhagubai Gangadhar Kashte
The Additional Collector, Parbhani
N.W. Sambre
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
