SHIVAJI GOVIND SHEJULversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2026:BHC-AUG:16203
                                                                        902-wp-9966-2025.odt
                                                  (1)


                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                 WRIT PETITION NO. 9966 OF 2025

                                        Shivaji Govind Shejul
                                               VERSUS
                                The State Of Maharashtra And Others
                                                   ...
                      Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Nagode Datta Govindrao
                            AGP for Respondent/State : Ms. R.R. Tandale
                 Advocate for Respondent No.5 : Mr. N.P. Aute h/f Mr. A.R. Nimbalkar
                                                   ...
                                           CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.

                                              DATED : APRIL 10, 2026

                 PER COURT :-

                 1.          Present writ petition takes exception to order dated

                 09.07.2025 passed by Additional Divisional Commissioner, Nashik in

                 Grampanchayat Appeal No.13 of 2025 thereby upholding judgment

                 and order dated 08.01.2025 passed by District Collector, Ahilyanagar

                 in Grampanchayat Dispute No.15 of 2024, thereby disqualifying

                 petitioner from holding post of Sarpanch of Village Panchayat in

                 terms of Section 14(1)(j-3) of Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act,

                 1959.

                 2.          The petitioner was directly elected as Sarpanch of Village

                 Panchayat from Scheduled Caste category for the term from 2022 to

                 2026. The respondent no.5 raised Grampanchayat Dispute No.15 of

                 2024 against petitioner contending that he has encroached upon

                 government property, as such incurred disqualification in terms of

                 Section 14(1)(j-3) of Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act.            The
                                                          902-wp-9966-2025.odt
                                   (2)


petitioner was served with notice in pursuance to aforesaid dispute.

The report of Gram Sevak was called.         Learned District Collector

relying upon report and documents appended thereto concluded that

petitioner encroached upon Gram Panchayat land, as such, incurred

disqualification. Consequently, passed order of disqualification which

is confirmed by Additional Divisional Commissioner.

3.           Mr. Nagode, learned advocate appearing for petitioner

raised two fold contentions. Firstly, petitioner was not given sufficient

opportunity of hearing, he was never served with copy of dispute filed

by respondent no.5 and without hearing petitioner, impugned order

has been passed. Mr. Nagode would further submit that petitioner

was allotted Gram Panchayat property in the year 2014. The

resolution of Gram Panchayat was passed to record petitioner’s name

as occupant in Gram Panchayat record. As such, petitioner cannot be

treated unauthorized occupant over government land.

4.           Per contra, learned AGP submits that there is no

document to show that petitioner was allotted aforesaid property by

Gram Panchayat and petitioner in authorized possession.

5.           Having considered submissions advanced by learned

advocates appearing for respective parties, it is discernible that land

in question is part of new gavthan recorded in name of Gram

Panchayat.    Undisputedly, petitioner is in occupation of part of

property. In the year 2014 during monthly meeting of Gram
                                                        902-wp-9966-2025.odt
                                   (3)


Panchayat, a resolution was passed to record petitioner’s name as

occupant of property.        As such, undisputedly petitioner is in

occupation of House No.431/1 situated in gavthan land owned by

Gram Panchayat Kendal (Khurd).            Although Gram Panchayat

Resolution dated 05.01.2022 shows that petitioner was granted house

under Pradhan Mantri Awaas Yojana, till this date, it is not

constructed.

6.             All aforesaid evidence shows petitioner’s occupation on

Gram Panchayat property without allotment of land either under

government resolution or on lease or as authorized holder under

permission of Gram Panchayat. The aforesaid documentary evidence

is considered by District Collector as well as Additional Divisional

Commissioner and they have recorded elaborate findings that

petitioner is unauthorized occupant of Gram Panchayat property.

7.             Although, Mr. Nagode, learned advocate appearing for

petitioner submits that petitioner was not given sufficient opportunity

of hearing by District Collector, record indicates that on 29.02.2024,

petitioner’s advocate caused appearance before District Collector,

however, he was absent when matter was taken for hearing. Be that

as it may, on consideration of documentary evidence on record, there

is no room to take any different view other than view taken by

authorities below.
                                                         902-wp-9966-2025.odt
                                  (4)


8.           In result, this Court finds that no case is made out to

cause interference in impugned order under Article 227 of

Constitution of India. Hence, Writ Petition stands rejected.




                                        (S.G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.)




Mujaheed//