( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3678 OF 2010 Prabhawati w/o Rajmal Jain and another. PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. P.R. Katneshwarkar, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.P. Tiwari, advocate for respondents No. 4 and 5. ..... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 3rd May, 2010] PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel. 2. The petitioners challenge the orders rendered by the Additional Collector, Jalgaon and the Additional Divisional Commissioner, Nasik. The Additional Collector held that both the petitioners are disqualified to continue as the Sarpanch and Upa-Sarpanch of the Village Panchayat due to their alleged misconduct. 3. It appears that they derived pecuniary benefits while being in the office as Sarpanch and Vice-Sarpanch ( 2 ) and incurred disqualification. The Village Panchayat record – Namuna No. 5 and Namuna No. 15 – indicated the payments received by them. It is obvious that they have abused their position as Sarpanch and Vice-Sarpanch, respectively and, therefore, the concurrent findings about their disqualification need not be interfered with. The petition is dismissed. No costs. [ V.R. KINGAONKAR ] JUDGE NPJ/wp3678-2010