1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR L.P.A. No.219/2011 in W.P. No.1923/2011 (D) ( Sau. Panchafula w/o Devidas Pawar ..Vs.. Additional Collector, Akola and others ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. S.D. Chopde, Adv. for appellant. CORAM : S.A. BOBDE & S.B. DESHMUKH JJ. DATE : 5.5.2 011 . Heard. The only contention raised by the learned Advocate for the appellant is that the Single Judge ought to have seen the finding of the Collector that the appellant did not conduct the meetings of the Gramsabha was not correct. In all fairness, Mr. Chopde, learned Advocate for the appellant, admitted that it is within the discretion of the Collector to accept the explanation submitted by the Sarpanch or not to accept the same. In the present case the Collector has refused to accept the explanation submitted by the appellant. The appellant has been found not to have conducted Gramsabhas and the 2 monthly meetings in the month of March 2010, even though the appellant has submitted the explanation for the same, the Collector has not accepted the same as he has no reason to interfere. We see no reason to interfere with the findings reached by the Collector and confirmed by the learned Single Judge. The letters patent appeal is, therefore, dismissed. C.A.Z. No.336/2011. In view of the above order, this civil application does not survive. Hence disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE Tambaskar.