1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5249 OF 2009 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5250 OF 2009 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5258 OF 2009 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5259 OF 2009 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5260 OF 2009 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5261 OF 2009 _______________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office } Memoranda of Coram, } Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's } orders or directions } and Registrar's orders } ___________________________}___________________________________ Mr. S.L.Jadhav, Advocate for petitioners. Mr. V.G.Shelke, A.G.P. for State. Mr. S.T.Veer,Advocate for respondent no. 3. Mr. S.R.Yadav, Advocate for respondent nos. 4 and 5. ........................... [ CORAM : B.R.GAVAI, J. ] DATE : 04/12/2009. PER COURT : 1. By way of present Writ Petitions, some of which are filed by the Gram Sevak and some of which are filed by the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, the petitioners challenge the order passed by 2 the Additional Collector, thereby disqualifying the Sarpanch and a direction to hold departmental proceedings against Gram Sevak. 2. Mr. Jadhav, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submit that the order of disqualification entails serious consequences. He submits that order of disqualification has been passed without giving an appropriate opportunity to the petitioner and as such the orders are not sustainable in law. Mr. Jadhav further submits that the Gram Sevak was holding the charge of six Gram Panhayats and as such in accordance with the direction issued by the State Govt., he was required to take meeting on 2/10/2009. 3. On perusal of the record, the authorities have come to the conclusion that the Gram Sevak has fabricated the record of holding meetings, when as a matter of fact the meetings were not held at all. It has further been observed that meetings of six Gram Panchayat were held on one day, in which Gram Sevak was present. It is humanly impossible for a person to attend six 3 meetings on one day and that too in six different villages. 4. In any case, in so far as the Gram Sevak is concerned, only departmental proceedings are directed to be initiated. The Gram Sevak can very well defend his case before the authority and point out the difficulties in his way. Needless to say that unless the departmental proceedings are initiated against Gram Sevak and he is found guilty in them, no punitive action can be taken. 5. In that view of the matter, there is no any merit in the case of Gram Sevak. 6. As far as the case of Sarpanch is concerned, they have not chosen to file reply to the notice issued by the Additional Collector. In that view of the matter, the Additional Collector was required to decide the matter exparte. Though in spite of several chances being given to them, they have neither submitted oral arguments nor filed written submissions. As such, the learned Additional Collector had no other alternative but to decide the matter on the basis of record produced before him. 4 7. In that view of the matter, I do not find any merit in the contention of the petitioners that the order which has been passed, has been passed without giving any opportunity to the petitioners. 8. In the result, no merit is found in the petitions. The same are, therefore, disposed of. [ B.R.GAVAI ] JUDGE knp/WP5249..........09