RAVINDRA DAGUJI THAKARE AND ANR vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR AGP AN DORS — WP/6033/2026
Case under Bombay Village Panchayat Act Section NA. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 04th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM010169972026
Filing Number
WP/9853/2026
Filing Date
06-04-2026
Registration No
WP/6033/2026
Registration Date
30-04-2026
Judge
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. J. JAMADAR
Coram
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. J. JAMADAR
Bench Type
Single
Category
ELECTION ( 12 )
Sub-Category
Other Rural Local Bodies ( 107 )
Judicial Branch
Civil
Decision Date
04th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed Off
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
RAVINDRA DAGUJI THAKARE AND ANR
Adv. RAMESHWAR GITE
SHARAD SHIVRAM PAWAR
Respondent(s)
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR AGP AN DORS
THE ADDITIONAL DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER, NASHIK
THE COLLECTOR, NASHIK
SAINATH NAGUJI KOLHE
Adv. BHAVRE PRADEEP D,UPENDRA SINGH
KHANDERAO RAJARAM PAWAR
KOMAL SUNIL KOLHE
Adv. UPENDRA SINGH
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. J. JAMADAR
FRESH ADMISSION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 04-05-2026 | FRESH ADMISSION |
Orders
Case Summary: WP/6033/2026 The High Court of Bombay dismissed the petitioners' writ petition challenging a Divisional Commissioner's order that partially quashed disqualification proceedings against Gram Panchayat members. The court held that disqualification under Section 14(1)(j-3) applies only when a Sarpanch or member themselves commits encroachment, or their family members/dependents do so—not when they merely facilitate encroachment by others. Since evidence showed only Respondent No. 5 actually committed encroachment, the disqualifications of Respondents 4 and 6 were rightfully quashed, though they could face separate removal proceedings under Section 39 for alleged misconduct or neglect in duty. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: WP/6033/2026 The High Court of Bombay dismissed the petitioners' writ petition challenging a Divisional Commissioner's order that partially quashed disqualification proceedings against Gram Panchayat members. The court held that disqualification under Section 14(1)(j-3) applies only when a Sarpanch or member themselves commits encroachment, or their family members/dependents do so—not when they merely facilitate encroachment by others. Since evidence showed only Respondent No. 5 actually committed encroachment, the disqualifications of Respondents 4 and 6 were rightfully quashed, though they could face separate removal proceedings under Section 39 for alleged misconduct or neglect in duty. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts