1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 3961 OF 2008 (Sau. Shobha Manikrao Gawali & Anr. vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. OCTOBER 21, 2008. Heard Shri Kasat, learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt. Bodade, learned AGP for respondents No. 1 to 3 and Shri Ghuge, learned counsel for respondent No.4. Shri Kasat, learned counsel for the petitioners argues that the petitioner has been disqualified under Section 14(j)(3) of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) without recording a finding as to when the alleged encroachment has been done. He states that the encroachment noticed by TILR is from city survey conducted in 1972-73 and the said proceedings are questioned by the petitioners by filing appeal under Section 247 of Land Revenue Code before the Superintendent of Land Record at Washim. He further states that as the authorities have not recorded any finding that the petitioners have done that encroachment and constructed after 2 the election of petitioner No.1 as Member of Gram Panchayat, the disqualification cannot apply. Shri Ghuge, learned counsel for respondent No. 4 raises a preliminary objection. He points out Section 53(3)(A) of the Act, Gram Panchayat has first passed an order and that order has not been appealed against. The order has, therefore, attained finality. The order records that the petitioner has encroached on public land and disqualification is only a consequence under Section 14(j)(3). According to him, when a finding of fact has not been assailed, the disqualification is a consequence which must ensue. In the circumstances, as I find that the remedy of filing appeal against the order dated 23.11.2007 is available to the petitioners, the present writ petition challenging the orders of disqualification is found to be not maintainable at this stage. The same is accordingly disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to take appropriate steps. Liberty is also given to the petitioners to challenge adverse orders therein, in accordance with law. JUDGE *GS.