1 lpa289-11.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.289/2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO.8246/2009 Govind Eknath Shirole .. petitioner Versus The State of Maha. & Ors. ... Respondents .... Mr.V.D.Sapkal h/f Mr.A.M.Gholap,Adv.for appellant. Mr.S.K.Kadam,AGP for respondent-State. Mr.P.R.Patil,Adv.for Respondent no.8. ... CORAM : NARESH H.PATIL AND T.V.NALAWADE, JJ. DATE : 17TH OCTOBER ,2011 PER COURT 1] Heard. 2] The appellant was disqualified to hold the post of President of Parola Municipal Council by an order passed by the Hon’ble Chief Minister on 29/8/2009 under the provisions of Section 55-B of the Maharashtra 2 lpa289-11.odt Nagarparishads, Nagarpnachayats, Industrial Townships Act, 1965. Consequently, the appellant was also debarred to contest elections of councilor of the said municipal council for 6 years. 3] The appellant challenged the said order by Writ Petition No.8246/2009. By order dated 27/9/2011, the learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition. 4] The learned counsel for the appellant Shri Sapkal submits that the appellant is not held responsible for misappropriation of amount. But under the impugned order, certain irregularities in discharge of duties were noticed. Considering the charges levelled and the material brought on record, the punishment awarded to the appellant was harsh according to the learned counsel. 5] The learned counsel Shri P.R.Patil for respondent-municipal corporation submits that the facts and the material placed before the Hon’ble Chief Minister indicates that the appellant’s conduct as a President of the municipal council was disgraceful. The appellant was not supposed to involve himself in such conduct which also attracts charges of forging documents, manipulation, participating in the objectionable acts. 6] The learned A.G.P. Shri S.K.Kadam supports the order passed by the 3 lpa289-11.odt State and the learned Single Judge. 7] We have perused the impugned orders. Considering the charges leveled and the material brought on record to prove the charges, we do not find that the view adopted by the Hon’ble Chief Minister in impugned order was based on no evidence. We do not find that there was procedural irregularities or violation of principles of natural justice in reaching the findings by the Hon’ble Chief Minister. 8] The learned Single Judge considered the issue in details and reached appropriate finding to dismiss the Writ Petition. 9] The President of Municipal Council holds an important post of public confidence ought not to behave in disgraceful manner. The findings reached in this regard do not call for interference by us while entertaining this Letters Patent Appeal. In the facts of the case, we are not convinced to interfere in the impugned order. Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed. 10] In view of disposal of Appeal, Civil Application No.12360/11 does not survive and the same is disposed of. (T.V.NALAWADE, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL,J.) umg/lpa289-11