Dismissed

Gram Panchayat, through Its Sarpanch, Smt. Jaywanta W/O Dhaniram Matale v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Rural Development, Mumbai and 3 Others

Bombay HC25 Jul 2016WP/2494/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Five writ petitions filed by Gram Panchayats challenging the denial of work orders by Zilla Parishads were dismissed. The Court held that Procurement orders exceeding Rs. 20,000 cannot be executed by Panchayats under Rule 3(3)(iii) of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis (Execution and Maintenance of works and development scheme through the agency of Panchayat Samiti and Village P

What did the court decide?

The writ petitions were rejected as they were devoid of merits; no directions were issued for allotment of work orders.

Gram Panchayat, through Its Sarpanch, Smt… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

wp2494.15 and connected petitions

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.2494 OF 2015

¶5

Gram Panchayat, Bhosa, District Gondia, through its Sarpanch Smt. Jaywanta W/o Dhaniram Matale

¶6

..vs..

¶7

The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Rural Development Department,

¶8

Mantralaya, Mumbai and ors

¶9

WITH

¶10

WRIT PETITION NO.5746 OF 2015

¶11

Gram Panchayat, Maregaon, District Gondia, thr its Sarpanch Gulab S/o Mayaram Thakare

¶12

..vs..

¶13

The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai and ors

¶14

WITH

¶15

WRIT PETITION NO.5747 OF 2015

¶16

Gram Panchayat, Berdipar, District Gondia, thr its Sarpanch Smt. Saritabai w/o Babulal Rane

¶17

..vs..

¶18

The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai and ors

¶19

WITH

¶20

WRIT PETITION NO.5885 OF 2015 Gram Panchayat, Aasoli, District Gondia, through its Sarpanch and ors

¶21

..vs..

¶22

The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai and ors

¶23

WITH

¶24

WRIT PETITION NO.5941 OF 2015 Gram Panchayat Dattora, Panchayat Samiti Gondia, through its Sarpanch

¶25

..vs..

¶26

The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai and ors

¶27

....................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court orders or directions Court's or Judge's Order and Registrar's orders

¶28

Court's or Judge's Order

¶29

Shri Ishwarchandra Choudhari, counsel for the petitioner. Shri A.Y. Kapgate, counsel for R-2 to 4.

¶30

W.P.No.5941/2015 Shri S.G. Karmarkar, cuonsel for the petitioner. Shri A.Y. Kapgate, counsel for R-2 to 4.

¶31

.....2/-

¶32

¶33

wp2494.15 and connected petitions

¶34

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & KUM. INDIRA K. JAIN, JJ. DATED : JULY 25, 2016.

¶35

Heard.

¶36

The Zilla Parishad has relied upon the provisions of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis (Execution and Maintenance of works and development scheme through the agency of Panchayat Samiti and Village Panchayat) Rules, 1964. As per Rule 3(3)(iii), if the expenditure on such development of work or construction exceeds Rs.20,000/-, the work cannot be executed by the petitioner/Panchayat.

¶37

In all these matters, cost of work exceeds Rs.20,000/-.

¶38

There is no challenge to this provision anywhere.

¶39

In this situation, the demand of the petitioner to direct the respondents/State or the respondents/Zilla Parishad to allot work orders to them cannot be entertained.

¶40

Since the writ petitions are devoid of merits, the same are rejected. No costs.

JUDGE JUDGE

!! BRW !!

.....3/-

wp2494.15 and connected petitions

¶45

¶46

C E R T I F I C A T E

¶47

I certify that this Order uploaded is a true and correct copy of original signed Order.

¶48

Uploaded by : Bhushan R.Wankhede. Uploaded on : - 26/07/2016 (Personal Assistant)

¶49

...../-

Gram Panchayat, through Its Sarpanch, Smt. Jaywanta W/O Dhaniram Matale v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Rural Development, Mumbai and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gram Panchayat, through Its Sarpanch, Smt. Jaywanta W/O Dhaniram Matale v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Rural Development, Mumbai and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Idea Cellular Limited, Nagpur through Its Authorized Representative Shri Girish M. Pawar Vs City of Nagpur Corporation, Thorugh Its Commissioner, Nagpur and 2 Others

Smt. Neeta W/O Amrut Chawdagor and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. the Secretary Department of Home, Mumbai and Others

Aniruddha Vyankatrao Kendre and Others Vs the Zilla Parishad, Gondia through Its Chief Executive Officer and Others

Kashish S/O. Kasturchand Jaiswal and Others Vs State of Maha., through Its Secreary, Urban Devp. Dept., Mumbai and Others

M/S Krushna Kumar Gokulchand Thr. Partner Mr. Krushna Kumar S/O Gokulchand Sharma Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary, Dept. of Food, Mumbai and Others

Late Shri Vitthalraoji Chamat Smruti Sewa Sanstha, Hrough Its Sec. Dnyaneshwar v. Chamat and Anothe Vs the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, and Others