wp2278.11.odt 1/2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO.2278/2011 Ruprao Vithobaji Dhok -vs- Additional Commissioner, Amravati and others ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders. or directions and Registrar's orders. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Adv. S. Shirpurkar, learned counsel for petitioner. Ms Taiwade, learned A.G.P. for respondents No.1, 2 & 9. CORAM : R.M. SAVANT, J. DATED : 08/06/2011 The order impugned in the above petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of The Constitution of India is that of the Additional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati- respondent No.1, dated 5th April, 2011 by which, the order passed by the Collector-respondent No.2 dated 5th February, 2011 has been confirmed. The said proceedings have arisen under the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, in view of the motion of no confidence passed against the petitioner in the meeting of the Gram Panchayat-respondent No.8 dated 15/11/2010. The orders passed by the Collector and the Additional Commissioner as referred to herein above are sought to be challenged inter alia on the sole ground that in holding the meeting dated 15th April, 2010 to consider the motion of no wp2278.11.odt 2/2 confidence, the Tahsildar-respondent No.9 has not followed the mandate of Section 35 of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act inasmuch as the obligation to hold the meeting within seven days of the receipt of the requisition has been breached. The undisputed position is that the requisition/notice is dated 08/11/2010 and the meeting is dated 15/11/2010. Considering the aforesaid two dates, it is not possible to countenance the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the said meeting was held after eight days and not within seven days. In that view of the matter, no case for interference in the writ jurisdiction is made out. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed. JUDGE KHUNTE