Writ petition challenging the rejection of a challenge to a no confidence motion against the petitioner. The court held that since a Full Bench had already held the rule regarding proposers seconders as directory, the impugned order could not be interfered with.
No 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.
912-WP-10125-2024.doc
VASANT ANANDRAO IDHOL
Digitally signed by VASANT ANANDRAO IDHOL Date: 2024.07.25 19:45:46 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 10125 OF 2024
Vidya Hanumant Bhapkar ...Petitioner Versus The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ...Respondents
Mr.D.V. Sutar with Ms.Anjali S. and Ms.Latika Kabad i/b Mr.Rupesh A. Zade for the Petitioner.
Mr.Vaibhav Charulwar, A.G.P. “B” Panel Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 – State.
CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J. DATE : 25th JULY, 2024
P.C.:
Kakde, 2014 (6) Mh.L.J. 804 , the learned Full Bench of this
1 of 2
VAI
912-WP-10125-2024.doc
Court has rendered an opinion that Rule 17 of Bombay Village Panchayats (Meetings) Rules, 1959 is directory, which would indicate, that the above plea by the learned counsel for the petitioner stands covered by what has been held by Full Bench, in view of which the impugned order does not meet any interference. The petition is dismissed. No costs.
(AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.)
2 of 2
VAI
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a no confidence motion without a proposer or seconder can be sustained when the challenge has already been rejected.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Tatyasaheb Ramchandra Kale vs. Navnath Tukaram KakdeReferred¶12
Tatyasaheb Ramchandra Kale .vs. Navnath Tukaram Kakde, 2014 (6) Mh.L.J. 804 · Who else cites this
VIDYA HANUMANT BHAPKAR
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
AVINASH G. GHAROTE
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
