Petitioner removed from post of Sarpanch by no-confidence motion contended he was not heard. Minutes showed he was given opportunity to address the meeting and his address was recorded. Court found contention factually incorrect and declined to interfere.
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.
37-WP-3425-2024.DOC
Arun
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 3425 OF 2024
Amar Sarjerao Dabhade …Petitioner Versus Collector Kolhapur & Anr …Respondents
Mr. Dheeraj Patil, for the Petitioner. Mr. Y.D. Patil, AGP, for the Respondent-State.
CORAM AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J. DATED: 11th June, 2024
PC:-
ARUN
RAMCHANDRA SANKPAL
Digitally signed by ARUN RAMCHANDRA SANKPAL Date: 2024.06.11 19:59:40 +0530
37-WP-3425-2024.DOC
recorded in the Minutes of the meeting which would indicate that aforesaid contention is factually incorrect.
(AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, removed as Sarpanch via no-confidence motion, was denied an opportunity to present his case in the meeting.
Amar Sarjerao Dabhade
Collector Kolhapur
Avinash G. Gharote
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
