Quashed

Smt. Kiran Ravindra Jadhav v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Principal Secretary and Ors.

Bombay HC9 Nov 2023WP/8522/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the High Court of Bombay questioned the dissolution of the Grampanchayat of Ukshi where six members resigned alleging targeting of the Sarpanch. The Court quashed the dissolution order and directed bye-elections, modifying an earlier stay to permit the petitioner to take decisions in consultation with officials.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dissolving the Grampanchayat was quashed and set aside. Bye elections were directed to be held. An earlier stay was modified to allow the petitioner to take policy decisions in cons

Smt. Kiran Ravindra Jadhav Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

WP 8522-2023.doc

¶2

Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 8522 OF 2023

¶4

Smt. Kiran Ravindra Jadhav

¶5

.Petitioner

¶6

Vs.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra through its Principal .Respondents Secretary & ors.

¶8

Mr. Shilpan Gaonkar a/w. Mr. Nikhil Patil i/b. Mr. P. M. Jadhav, Advocate, for the Petitioner

¶9

Mr. P. P. Pujari, AGP, for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 – State Mr. A. V. Pawaskar, Advocate, for Respondent No. 4 Mr. Dileep Satale, Advocate, for Respondent Nos. 6 to 11 Mr. S. B. Shetye a/w. Mr. Akshay S. Pansare, Advocate, for Respondent No. 12 - SEC

¶10

CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATE : 09.11.2023

¶11

P. C.

¶12

Heard Mr. Gaonkar, learned counsel appearing for the

¶13

Petitioner, Mr. Pujari, learned AGP, appearing for Respondent

¶14

Nos. 1 to 3 – State, Mr. Satale, learned counsel appearing for Respondent Nos. 6 to 11 and Mr. Shetye, learned counsel appearing for Respondent No. 12 – SEC. I have heard Mr. Pawaskar, learned counsel appearing for Respondent No. 4 on the earlier occasion.

¶15

By the present Writ Petition, the challenge is to the

¶16

1 of 5

¶17

WP 8522-2023.doc

¶18

legality and validity of the order dated 31.05.2023 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division, Navi Mumbai, by which Grampanchayat - Ukshi, Taluka - Sangmeshwar, District – Ratnagiri has been dissolved. The factual position on record clearly shows that the said Grampanchayat has seven members and out of seven members, six members have resigned and therefore, the said order has been passed.

¶19

It is the submission of learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is the sarpanch and a woman belonging to Scheduled Caste category. She has also contested the said election on the post reserved for a female Scheduled Caste candidate and just to ensure that woman belonging to Scheduled Caste should not remain sarpanch, other members have resigned. It is the submission of learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner that there are no allegations whatsoever against the Petitioner and even ‘Motion of No Confdence’ has not been moved against her and no allegations of misconduct are made against her. Only with a view to prevent a woman belonging to Scheduled Category to be Sarpanch of the Grampanchayat, Respondent Nos. 6 to 11 have resigned. He, therefore, submitted that the order dissolving the Grampanchayat – Ukshi be quashed

¶20

2 of 5

¶21

WP 8522-2023.doc

¶22

& set aside and the bye election be held for the posts of members which have become vacant due to resignation of Respondent Nos. 6 to 11.

¶23

Mr. Satale, learned counsel appearing for Respondent

¶24

Nos. 6 to 11 submits that he has no objection for the said course of action.

¶25

Mr. Pawaskar, learned counsel appearing for the

¶26

Respondent No. 4 who made submissions on the earlier occasions submitted that the Respondent No. 4 – Chief Executive Offcer has already submitted proposal for conducting bye election to the vacant post.

¶27

Mr. Shetye, learned counsel appearing for the State

¶28

Election Commission states that the State Election Commission has already received requisition from the Collector, Ratnagiri for holding bye election for the vacant posts of members. He states that accordingly, the bye election will be held in the next round of

¶29

the Grampanchayat election. Mr. Shetye, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No. 12 states that same shall be held as early as possible.

¶30

3 of 5

¶31

WP 8522-2023.doc

¶32

Accordingly, the impugned order dated 31.05.2023

¶33

passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division, Navi Mumbai is quashed & set aside.

¶34

The State Election Commission to expeditiously conduct bye election for the posts of members of said Grampanchayat which became vacant due to resignation by the Respondent nos. 6 to 11.

¶35

Till bye elections for the vacant posts are held, ad-interim relief granted by order dated 14.07.2023 with modifcation as set out herein below shall remain in operation. The said order dated 14.07.2023 reads as under :-

¶36

“1. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on 04 August 2023.

¶37

Learned AGP waives service of notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

¶38

The learned counsel for the petitioner on instructions states that the Administrator has not yet taken charge. In that view of the matter, till next date, there shall be ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (B). However, the petitioner shall not take any policy decision .”

¶39

(Emphasis added)

¶40

4 of 5

¶41

WP 8522-2023.doc

¶42

The said prayer clause (b) reads as under :-

¶43

“(B) Pending the hearing and fnal disposal of this Petition, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to stay the execution, implementation, operation and effect of the (i) the impugned order dated 31.05.2023 passed by Respondent No. 2; (ii) consequential offcial gazette dated 01.06.2023, to this extent; and (iii) order dated 02.06.2023 passed by the Respondent No. 4 for appointing an administrator on Respondent No. 5 Grampanchayat”

¶44

It is further clarifed that above relief granted on 14.07.2023 stands modifed to the extent that if any major policy decision or major monetary decision is required to be taken, then the Petitioner shall take such decision in consultation with the CEO/the Deputy CEO of Zilla Parishad, Ratnagiri.

¶45

The Writ Petition is disposed of in above terms with no order as to costs.

¶46

(MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.)

¶47

5 of 5

Smt. Kiran Ravindra Jadhav v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Principal Secretary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Kiran Ravindra Jadhav v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Principal Secretary and Ors.

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

Smt. Sarala Anupkumar Sony and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra Ministry of Co. Op and Textile and Anr.

Pallabhkrishna Nityanand Bose and Anr. Vs Rupee Co-Operative Bank Ltd. and Ors.

Pallabhkrishna Nityanand Bose and Anr. Vs Rupee Cooperative Bank Ltd. and Ors.

Yogesh Popatlal Soni and Anr. Vs Union of India Thr. General Manager

Ramesh Agarwal and Ors. Vs the Deputy Registrar Csd Ward and Ors.

Medha Nitin Vaidya and Ors. Vs Jayvant Parshuram Naik and Ors.