Bombay High Court
RUKMABAI LAXMAN KHOKLEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
- Bench
- ABASAHEB D SHINDE
Holding
The Court held that the no‑confidence motion was validly conducted and the orders were not erroneous.
Summary
The petitioner, Rukmabai Laxman Khokle, filed a writ petition challenging a February 2025 order that effected a ‘no‑confidence motion’ against her under the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959, and a subsequent April 2025 order by the District Collector dismissing her appeal. She alleged procedural irregularities in the conduct of the motion and claimed the Tehsildar’s approval and the appellate authority’s order were erroneous. The State and other respondents defended the validity of the motion, noting that the petitioner lost the vote by a three‑quarter majority (8:0). The Court examined whether the statutory procedure for a no‑confidence motion had been complied with and whether the approvals were lawful. Finding that the motion was duly passed with the requisite majority and no procedural defect was evident, the Court held there was no error in the impugned orders. Consequently, the petition was dismissed as lacking merit.
Issues considered
- What procedural requirements under the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 must be complied with for a no‑confidence motion against a Panchayat member?
- Were the orders dated 06‑02‑2025 and 22‑04‑2025 issued in violation of those statutory procedures?
Legislation cited
Subjects
- No‑confidence motion
- Village Panchayat
- Procedural compliance
- Writ petition
- Dismissal
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:17193
1 946.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
946 WRIT PETITION NO. 12162 OF 2025
RUKMABAI LAXMAN KHOKLE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Bagal Suraj R.
AGP/APP for Respondent/State : Mrs. M.N. Ghanekar
Advocate for Respondent No.4,6,7,8,9,10 And 11 : Mr. B.G. Deshmukh
…
CORAM : ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.
DATE : 18.04.2026
PER COURT :
. Heard Mr. Bagal, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGP
for the respondent/State and Mr. Deshmukh, learned counsel for the
respondents.
2. By this Writ Petition, the petitioner takes an exception to the
order passed on 06.02.2025 carrying out ‘No-confidence motion’
against the petitioner as well as the order dated 22.04.2025 passed by
learned District Collector thereby, dismissing the appeal filed by the
petitioner.
3. Learned counsel Mr. Bagal submits that while carrying out the
‘No-confidence motion’ against the petitioner, the procedure as
prescribed under ‘The Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959’ has
not been followed in letter and spirit. He submits that there is a defect
in the procedure adopted while carrying out the ‘No-confidence
2 946.doc
motion’.
4. He would further submit that the Tehsildar has in the first place
committed an error in approving the same and the order passed by the
Appellate Authority dated 22.04.2025 is also erroneous.
5. On the other hand, the learned AGP as well as learned counsel
appearing for the respondent Nos.4 to 10 supports the order of ‘No-
confidence motion’ as well as order passed by the Appellate Authority.
6. Considering the fact that the petitioner has lost the vote of ‘No-
confidence motion’ by ¾th majority i.e. (8:0) and thereby lost the
confidence, I do not find any error committed in either of the orders
which are impugned.
7. The Writ Petition is therefore, devoid of any substance and hence,
the same stands dismissed.
( ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J. )
vsj..
Checking your session…