1 Lgc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2173 OF 2010 Shri Nandkumar Sahebrao Mane : Petitioner versus Shri Pandurang Vithal Mane & ors. : Respondents. Shri Uday Warunjikar for the Petitioner Mr. V S Talkute for Respondent No.1. Shri V S Gokhale, AGP, for the Respondent Nos.3 and 4. CORAM : A M KHANWILKAR & R M SAVANT, JJ DATED : 18th March 2010 P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent. Mr.V S Gokhale, learned AGP appearing for the Respondent Nos.3 and 4 waives service for the said Respondents. 3. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the decision of the Additional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune dated 2nd February 2010 who 2 in turn confirmed the order passed by the Additional Collector, Satara dated 26th February 2009 holding that the petitioner has incurred disqualification being defaulter in respect of the property tax to be paid in relation to the properties bearing Nos.259/1, 259/2 and 261/1. 4. The first authority proceeded on the basis that bill No. 4460 dated 22nd June 2007 was prepared in respect of property bearing No.259/1 for the sum of Rs.2932/­ and another bill bearing No.4461 dated 22nd June 2007 was prepared in respect of property bearing No.259/2 for the sum of Rs.756/­ and the same were duly served on the petitioner but the petitioner chose to remain in arrears. 5. Before the Appellate Authority a specific grievance was made by the petitioner, as is noted in the grounds of Appeal in paras 4 and 7 that original bills in question were never issued to the petitioner or served on the petitioner and, the copies thereof are found in the bill book itself. In that view of the matter, since 3 there was no demand raised against the petitioner, the question of petitioner incurring disqualification does not arise. The Appellate Authority without analysing the said factual aspect of the matter, which was a specific grievance made by the petitioner, proceeded on the basis that the said bills were issued and duly served on the petitioner and the petitioner failed to pay the same in time. 6. Considering the above, we set aside the order of the Appellate Authority on this limited count and direct the Petitioner to appear before the Appellate Authority who would re­examine the contentions of the petitioner raised in Paras 4 and 7 of the Appeal Memo that the bills in respect of the said two properties were never issued and served on the petitioner and the same are still available in the original bill book. The Appellate Authority shall consider that aspect of the matter on its own merits in accordance with law. 7. All questions in that behalf are kept open. We clarify that it would be open for the Appellate Authority to examine as to 4 whether the Petitioner has incurred disqualification on account of knowledge of existence of such outstanding bills in his capacity as Sarpanch. 8. We also make it clear that if the contentions of the Petitioner were to be accepted and the original bill is still found in the bill book, then it would be a case for proceeding against the concerned official who was responsible to serve the said bills on the petitioner as soon as the same were prepared. 9. The Appellate Authority shall however decide the remanded proceedings as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of two weeks from today. The Petitioner shall appear before the Appellate Authority on 25th March 2010 at 11.00 a.m. in the office of the Appellate Authority who in turn shall proceed to hear the Petitioner on the same day or may fix the matter on such day as may be convenient to proceed. The final decision to be rendered within a period of two weeks from today. Rule is accordingly made absolute to the aforesaid extent. 5 10. The learned AGP to communicate this order to the Appellate Authority forthwith without waiting for the authenticated copy of the order. 11. The Petitioner, through his counsel, undertakes to extend necessary cooperation to the Appellate Authority for early disposal of the remanded proceedings. (A M KHANWILKAR, J) (R M SAVANT, J)