1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 5002 OF 2009. ( Dhanraj M. Ghouke -: versus :- Prabhakar T. Shinde and others ) 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. DATED : NOVEMBER 21, 2009. Heard Shri S.L. Kotwal, learned counsel for petitioner, Shri V.G. Dhage, learned counsel for respondent no.1 and learned A.G.P. for respondent nos. 3 to 5. Petitioner is found to be disqualified for committing encroachment by erecting pan thela on government land. Both the Authorities are concurrently against the petitioner. Shri Kotwal, learned counsel for petitioner contend that pan thela has been placed on the said land and exists since 1991. Gram Panchayat has assessed it to property tax and accordingly taxes are being paid regularly. Hence petitioner cannot be said to have taken advantage of his post as Member of Gram Panchayat to which he was elected in 2007. He further states that his subsequent election as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat also therefore, is totally irrelevant, in so far as the alleged encroachment is 2 concerned. Lastly, he points out that the pan thela was transferred by petitioner to his younger brother on 07.09.2005 and since then petitioner is not owner of the said structure or business. However, he fairly states that pan thela was not transferred in records of gram panchayat in the name of said brother and therefore, the taxes though paid by said brother, appeared to be paid in the name of petitioner. In the circumstances, he argues that looking to the object of the provisions, by which the disqualification has been added, as petitioner has not taken any advantage of his post, the provisions itself is not applicable and petitioner cannot be declared as disqualified. Shri Dhage, learned counsel as also learned A.G.P. states that encroachment was in existence on the date of election and even thereafter, and some payment of taxes does not regularize it. They point out that neither the Gram Panchayat nor State Government has allotted the said land to petitioner in accordance with law. They further dispute the agreement dated 07.09.2005 and contend that the said agreement is rightly not looked into by the authorities below. The facts clearly show that existence of pan thela on the said government land has been admitted by the petitioner. The provision prescribed for disqualification does not contemplate any application of mind to find out whether present petitioner has taken disadvantage of his post as Member or Sarpanch for said purpose. Mere payment of property tax to gram Panchayat cannot have the effect of regularizing the encroachment or legalizing the act of present petitioner. The transfer of said business to his brother has not been established on record and authority have found tht 3 document dated 07.09.2005 is not authentic for said purpose. The Authorities have considered the facts and their findings on the said ground cannot be labeled either as erroneous or perverse. No case is made out warranting any interference in writ jurisdiction. Writ Petition is therefore, dismissed. No costs. JUDGE Rgd.