- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5753/2010 1] Avinash s/o Anantrao Jadhavar, age 34 yrs., occu.agri., r/o Ratnapur Tq.Kallam Dist.Osmanabad. 2] Shashikant s/o Shrirang Jadhavar, age 35 yrs., occu.service, r/o as above. 3] Sudhir s/o Vishwanath Waghmare, age 35 yrs., occu.service, r/o as above. 4] Jaidrath s/o Dashrath Waghmare, age 45 yrs., occu.agri., r/o as above. 5] Ramesh s/o Vithalrao Jadhavar, age 39 yrs., occu.agri., r/o as above. 6] Kesharbai w/o Achyutrao Jadhavar, age 50 yrs., occu.household, r/o as above. ...Petitioners.. Versus 1] The Tahsildar, Kallam. Tq.Kallam Dist.Osmanabad. 2] Shivkant s/o Haribhau Bangar, age 40 yrs., occu.agri., r/o Ratnapur Tq.Kallam Dist.Osmanabad. ...Respondents... - 2 - ..... Shri S.G. Chapalgaonkar, Advocate for petitioners. Shri K.M. Suryawanshi, AGP for respondent no.1. Shri S.J. Salunke, Advocate for respondent no.2. ..... CORAM: B.R. GAVAI & K.U. CHANDIWAL, JJ. DATE: 24.09.2010 PER COURT : 1] Heard counsel for the parties. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Petition is heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of learned counsel for the parties. 2] By way of present petition, the petitioners challenge the proceedings of Ratnapur Grampanchayat dated 5.6.2010 whereby the respondent no.1 has refused to consider no confidence motion moved by the present petitioners against the respondent no.2. 3] No confidence motion was moved against the respondent no.2 on 10.8.2009. The said no confidence motion was moved on a joint requisition against the respondent no.2 as well as the Up-Sarpanch. No confidence motion was carried in the meeting dated 17.8.2009. Being aggrieved thereby, the - 3 - respondent no.2 and the Up-Sarpanch preferred Writ Petition No.534/2010 before this Court. The said petition was allowed on the ground that a joint requisition was not permissible against the Sarpanch and Up-Sarpanch. Subsequently, another notice was issued by the present petitioners on 31.5.2010. On the basis of the said notice by the said requisition, the respondent no.1 conveyed the meeting of Grampanchayat on 5.6.2010. However, in the said meeting, the petitioners were not permitted to move the no confidence motion on the ground that the said requisition was submitted within a period of one year from the date on which the resolution was passed in the meeting dated 17.8.2009. The present case is squarely covered by the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Ramesh V/s Sheshrao & others reported at AIR 1999 Supreme Court, 1607 wherein it is observed thus: “The object of the provision clearly is to prevent frivolous No Confidence Motion repeatedly within one year, if the earlier one has not been even moved or has been defeated because of the want of the requisite majority for passing the same. In the present case, the first motion was carried by the requisite majority but it became ineffective because the Commissioner on appeal by the Sarpanch held the Motion of No Confidence to be invalid for want of the requisite notice of holding the special meeting and, therefore, the bar contained in S.35(3A) would not be attracted in such a situation.” - 4 - 4] In that view of the matter, the petition will have to be allowed. The proceedings of the meeting dated 5.6.2010 are quashed and set aside. The respondent no.1 is directed to re-convey the meeting of Ratnapur Grampanchayat within a period of two weeks from today for considering the requisition submitted by the petitioners dated 31.5.2010. Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms. No order as to costs. Authenticated copy of this order be supplied to the learned AGP to act upon. (K.U. Chandiwal, J.) (B.R. Gavai, J.) ndk/c2491026