1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 691 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. WRIT PETITION NO.: 691 OF 2011 *** 1. Heard Finally, Advocate Mr. S. B. Bhapkar with Advocate Mr. Osmanpurkar for Petitioner, Mr. K. B. Jadhav for Respondent NO.3, learned A.G.P. Mr. D. R. Korde for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Mr. S. B. Ghatol Patil for person who has filed caveat but who is not made party to the petition. 2. Mr. Bhapkar points out that disqualification of petitioner is under section 14 (1) (g) of The Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958 which necessitates a conclusion that she had any share or interest either directly or indirectly in the work done as per orders of Gram Panchayat. He has invited attention to application for disqualification as filed by respondent Nos.4 to 8 to show that except for vaguely alleging financial gain nothing more has been pleaded or pointed out. Neither Additional Collector 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 691 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. nor Additional Commissioner has found that petitioner secured any wrongful gain in the process. According to the story of petitioner, that amount was to be paid to labour who completed the work as per Central Government scheme and as Respondent No.3 was having additional charge of some other village, the amount was required to be withdrawn by petitioner herself ought to have been accepted. He points out that there is no complaint by any labour of short payment or non-payment. 3. Learned counsel appearing for Respondent NO.3 states that he has pointed out correct position even to lower authorities and according to him petitioner did not have any share or interest in the work. 4. Learned A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 as also Advocate Mr. Patil for caveator are supporting the impugned orders. According to Advocate Mr. Patil Respondent Nos.4 to 8 who 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 691 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. filed complaint before Collector have now colluded with the petitioner and, therefore, have chosen not to appear. He states that the caveator, therefore, ought to have been heard by Collector or in any case by Additional Commissioner. He also states that caveator filed independent complaint pointing out irregularities before Collector but no opportunity of hearing was given and that complaint has not been considered so far. According to him, the complaint looked into by Collector itself in paragraph Nos.4 and 5 (A) show the interest of petitioner in the work done. 5. Learned A.G.P. also relies upon very same paragraphs to show that disqualification under section 14 (1) (g) is correctly recorded by the authorities. 6. The provisions of law in this respect are very clear. The petitioner must be shown to have directly or indirectly any 4 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 691 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. share or interest in any work done by order of Panchayat or any contract with/ by or on behalf of Panchayat. The pleadings in complaint looked into by Collector do not show any such share or interest. Only because amount of cheque was withdrawn by Petitioner that by itself is not sufficient to infer such share or interest. Something more is required and there is no pleading or no evidence about that material ingredient. 7. The Collector as also Additional Commissioner have found that the alleged relationship of petitioner with Respondent No.3 has not been established. The question of such share or interest is considered by this Court in the judgment in the case of "Jyotitai Vikas Gawande V/s Additional Commissioner and others" reported in 2009 (5) Mh.L.J. 486. 8. The Additional Commissioner in appeal filed by the present Petitioner, found that 5 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 691 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. withdrawal of amount by petitioner herself creates suspicion. He has also recorded that though this withdrawal is not sufficient to attract disqualification as it is not a factor indicating direct interest, he has found such withdrawal improper and amounting to financial irregularity. When there are no complaints by any labour about short payment or non-payment, why and how withdrawal by Sarpanch itself constitutes financial irregularity has not been clarified. I, therefore, find the issue is covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of "Jyotitai Vikas Gawande V/s Additional Commissioner and others" (Supra). 9. Impugned order is not sustainable. Same is quashed and set aside. 10. The caveator has not been shown as party before this Court. His complaint is not looked into by the Collector. Caveator, therefore, is free to take recourse to such 6 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.: 691 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. remedies as are open to him in the matter in accordance with law. Petition is, thus, allowed. No costs. 11. In view of final disposal of the writ petition itself nothing further survives in Civil Application NO.2493 of 2011 and as such the same also stands disposed of. [B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J.] Dated:08/03/2011. ans/691