FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.10952 OF 2010 “Pankajbhau Shaymkant Mahajan Vs. State of Maharashtra and others” Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 1 Mr.M.S. Taur, Advocate holding for Mr. A.N. Kakade, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. S.K. Kadam, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 Mr. A.K. Tiwari, Advocate for respondent Nos. 5 and 6. CORAM :- D.B. BHOSALE & M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATE :- 20th April, 2011. PER COURT :- 1] Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2] This petition has been filed for the following reliefs. “That by issuing appropriate writ, order or direction in the like nature, the action of the respondent no.3 to sub delegate the powers confirmed on him to hold and conduct the meeting be declared as null and void with further direction to quash and set aside the appointment of respondent Nos. 5 and 6 for the post of Sarpanch and Upa-Sarpanch of Grampanchayat, made on 19.9.2010 of village Nasirabad Taluka Nasirabad District Jalgaon. That, by issuing appropriate writ order or direction in like nature the respondent authorities may kindly be directed to conduct fresh election of Sarpanch and Upa-Sarpanch of the village Nasirabad by setting aside the earlier meeting held on 19.9.2010.” 3] There is no dispute that some of the members of the Gram Panchayat had filed disputes under Section 33(5) of the FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.10952 OF 2010 “Pankajbhau Shaymkant Mahajan Vs. State of Maharashtra and others” Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 2 Bombay Village Panchayat Act before the Additional Collector, raising challenge to the election of Sarpanch and Upa-Sarpanch on the very same grounds , as raised in the present writ petition. 4] We are informed that the Additional Collector decided the dispute vide order dated 15.12.2010 and that the aggrieved parties have challenged the said order in appeal before the Additional Commissioner, Nasik Division, Nasik being Appeal Nos. 116/2010 and 118/2010. In both these appeals, the petitioner is a respondent. The petitioner has not chosen to file dispute under Section 33(5) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, and has approached this court directly by way of the present writ petition. 5] In view thereof, we are not inclined to entertain this writ petition. It is open to the petitioner to raise all contentions in the appeal pending before the Commissioner, where he is a respondent. 6] In the circumstances, this petition is dismissed. All the contentions of the parties are kept open. [M.T. JOSHI, J.] [D.B. BHOSALE, J.] grt/- FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.10952 OF 2010 “Pankajbhau Shaymkant Mahajan Vs. State of Maharashtra and others” Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 3