{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.793 OF 2009 Balnath Navnath Tupe & Another PETITIONERS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and others RESPONDENTS ....... Mr.N.B.Narwade, Advocate for petitioners Mr.N.N.Jadhav, AGP for respondents / State Mr.Deelip Patil Bankar, Advocate for respondent No.4 Mr.B.G.Sagade Patil, Advocate for respondent No.6 ....... [CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, and A.V.POTDAR, J.J.] DATE: 22 nd September 2009 PER COURT : 1. By this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for quashing and setting aside the communication / order passed by the Divisional Commissioner dated 06.01.2009, dissolving the Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Committee, headed by the petitioners, which came to be constituted under the Scheme, namely, Bharat Nirman Drinking Water Scheme. 2. By virtue of the aforesaid scheme, a committee, headed by the petitioners, which is called as “Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Committee” came to be constituted on 21.04.2007. According to the {2} petitioners the aforesaid committee has completed nearly 70 to 75 % work of the water supply scheme and only about 25 % work has remained to be completed. According to the petitioners, the 6 th respondent had submitted complaints on earlier two occasions and on inquiry, it was found that there was no substance in the complaints made by the 6 th respondent. However, curiously, according to the petitioners, by the impugned order dated 06.01.2009, the committee has been dissolved on a specious ground that certain irregularities have been noticed. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner has invited our attention to the order impugned in the present petition, dated 06.01.2009. In the aforesaid impugned order it has been noticed that prima facie irregularities had been found in the management of the work by the committee and, therefore, inquiry was directed to be conducted. The respondents have annexed along with the affidavit in reply the report of the inquiry conducted by the Block Development Officer, Class-I, Vaijapur, Dist-Aurangabad. The authority has opined that the petitioners had not held Gram Sabha and the irregularities had been noticed in the conduct of the committee. 4. According to the petitioners one last opportunity be given to the petitioners for holding meeting of the Gram Sabha for concluding the 25% work which has remained to be completed. 5. Respondents, in the affidavit in reply, have contended that several irregularities were noticed. At para 9 of the affidavit in reply, it is stated that the Gram Sabha was not held in accordance with the Rules {3} and the amount of public contribution was also not specified. It is further stated that by communication dated 30.03.2009, the Block Development Officer, Vaijapur has been requested to take steps for holding meeting of the Gram Sabha, for constitution of the new Committee. 6. The petitioners have no legally enforceable right to be the members of the Committee since irregularities are noticed, particularly in holding meetings of the Gram Sabha and hence, by the order impugned in the present petition, the Committee headed by the petitioners came to be dissolved. We do not notice any irregularity in the order impugned in the present petition and, therefore, no interference is called for. It is extremely surprising that despite dissolution of the committee, way back in January 2009, no steps have been taken for constitution of a fresh committee. 7. Writ petition is accordingly summarily dismissed with no order as to costs. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] [P.V.HARDAS, J.] drp/wp793-09