-1- IN IN IN THE THE THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE APPELLATE APPELLATE JURISDICTION JURISDICTION JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1403 OF 2008 NO.1403 OF 2008 NO.1403 OF 2008 Baliram Suryakant Visapure ...Petitioner v/s State of Maharashtra and ors. ...Respondents Mr H.S. Venegavkar for Petitioner. Mr C.R. Sonawane, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH AND N.D. DESHPANDE JJ. DATE : 28TH APRIL 2008. -2- P.C. :- 1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the petitioner and respondent Nos.1 to 3. 2. The petitioner, by this petition, seeks direction to the respondent No.2 - Collector, Satara to give an opportunity to the petitioner to raise objection to the increase in the number of wards of respondent No.4 - Pachwad Grampanchayat and consequent increase in the number of members of Grampanchayat. The grievance of the petitioner is that as per law, before making final Notification in respect of increasing number of wards and number of members, the Collector is obliged to issue a notice inviting objections from the villagers to the proposed action. According to the petitioner, the notice was prepared by the Office of the Collector on 21st January 2008. The Tahasildar was directed to publish that on the Chavdi of the village and according to that notice, objections were to be filed on or before 25th January 2008. According to paragraph 3 of the petition, the notice dated 21st January 2008 was published in the village Chavdi in the afternoon of 25th January 2008 and therefore, the petitioner and other villagers had no opportunity to raise any objection. -3- According to the petitioner, now because no objection could be raised by the petitioner, final Notification is issued. According to the learned counsel appearing for respondents, the final Notification has not yet been issued. The reply has been filed on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 to 3. Perusal of that reply shows that the allegations made in paragraph 3 that the notice dated 21st January 2008 was published in the village on 25th January 2008 in the afternoon has not been denied and therefore, that fact will have to be accepted as established for the purpose of deciding this petition. It is therefore obvious that the villagers have been denied an opportunity to raise objection to the proposed increase in wards and number of members by publishing notice late. In our opinion, therefore, following order would meet the ends of justice. 3. The Collector, Satara is directed to republish the notice as required by Rule 591) of Mumbai Grampanchayat (Number of Members, Division of Wards and Reservation of Wards) Rules 1966 afresh in such a manner that the villagers get an opportunity to raise objections and then take further action in accordance with law. Rule is made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs. . Parties to act on the copy of this order duly -4- authenticated by the Sheristedar / Private Secretary of the Court. . Certified copy expedited. ( D.K. DESHMUKH J.) ( N.D. DESHPANDE J.)