Sheshroa Bhauro Jadhav vs Commissioner, Aurangabad Division And ... on 8 March, 1982
10. The Village Panchayat in Dharna's case (supra) had passed a resolution for break up of the Panchayat on 18th July 1961. After elections thereafter, the Panchayat passed a contrary resolution on 7th December 1964. The Commissioner issued the impugned notification under Section 4 separating the villages thereafter on 2nd December 1965. Neither the newly elected Panchayat was consulted much less its members individually. The Court held that the notification was bad in law for want of (1) consultation with the Panchayat as constituted on the date of decision after elections and (2) opportunity to such individual members affected to show cause against such break up. The discussion in Paragraph (14) shows that the Court was satisfied that 1961 resolution of the Panchayat was ever placed before the Commissioner. This amounts to a finding that there was no consultation with even the Panchayat as existed before elections of 1963 or constituted thereafter. This finding of fact was enough by itself to support the petitioner's case therein and decision on the law points raised was really unneccessary. This apart, we find it difficult to agree with the view that the Commissioner was under any obligation to verify the views of the Panchayat after the elections were on the record or that the members vacating the office consequent to break up of the Panchayat were entitled to any independent hearing. With great respect, such a view is not warranted by the wording of section 4 of the Act and Mr. Bora could not draw our attention to any principle or authority for such a proposition. The discussion in paragraphs (15) and (16) is too scanty to afford any linking of the principle underlying the said view.