1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 2983 of 2011 Kisna @ Krushna Govinda Chute Vs. The Additional Commissioner, Nagpur and others. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ms. Kirti Satpute, Adv. for the petitioner. Mr. S.M. Bhagde, AGP for the respondent nos. 1 & 2. Mr. V.D. Raut, Adv. for respondent no.3. Mrs. Jawde, Adv. for respondent no. 4. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK J. DATE : 23 rd September, 2011. By this petition, the petitioner impugns the orders passed by the Additional Collector, Nagpur, dated 27.2.2009 disqualifying the petitioner under the provisions of 14(1)(J-3) of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958, and that of the Additional Commissioner, Nagpur Division, Nagpur, dated 31st of March, 2011, upholding the order passed by the Additional Collector. The petitioner has been disqualified from the membership of the Gram Panchayat on the ground that he had encroached upon the Govt. land. Though it was the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had not encroached upon the Govt. land and was staying in the property for long, both the authorities on an appreciation of the various documents produced on record, held that the petitioner had encroached upon the Govt. land. While recoding the aforesaid finding of facts, the authority relied on the noting of the Village Officer and the reports of the Talathi and the Tahsildar. Thus, it 2 appears that the finding is recorded by the authorities on an appreciation of the documents on record. The finding of facts cannot be lightly interfered with in exercise of the writ jurisdiction. The submission made on behalf of th petitioner that under the provisions of Section 14(1)(J-3) a member cannot be disqualified if he is said to have encroached upon the Govt. land prior to his election as a member and the said provisions would come into play only if the member encroaches upon the Govt. land or public property, after his election as a member of the Gram Panchayat. The submission made on behalf of the petitioner is misplaced and is liable to be rejected as the provisions of Section 14(1)(J-3) cannot be interpreted in that manner. Since the orders passed by both the authorities are just and proper, the writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE Hirekhan