Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.21 seconds)Section 36 in The Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 [Entire Act]
Sow. Gangabai Vithal Bade vs The State Of Maharashtra on 14 December, 2012
17] This Court in the case of Gangabai Vithal Bade Vs.
State of Maharashtra & ors. Reported 2013 [3]
Bom.C.R.277, it has been held at paras 4 and 5, as
under:-
Gunwantro Yeshwantrao Deshmukh vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr. on 15 June, 1981
26. Learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No.4 has relied
on the decision of Gunwantrao Yeshwantrao Deshmukh (supra).
However, the said decision will not apply to the present case. In
the facts and circumstances of that case, it has been held that,
there was no sufficient cause for failure to convene the meeting.
M/S Puri Investments vs M/S Young Friends And Co. on 23 February, 2022
19. The Supreme Court in the case of Puri Investments V.
Young Friends and Co. and Others.3, in paragraph 14, has held as
follows :-
Ravi Yashwant Bhoir vs The Collector, District Raigad & Ors on 2 March, 2012
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Ravi Yashwant Bhoir Vs. District Collector, Raigad and
others reported in [2012] 4 SCC 407 has held at para
nos.35, 36 and 37 as under:
Jyoti Basu & Others vs Debi Ghosal & Others on 26 February, 1982
35. The elected official is accountable to its
electorate because he is being elected by a large
number of voters. His removal has serious
repercussions as he is removed from the post and
declared disqualified to contest the elections for a
further stipulated period, but it also takes away the
right of the people of his constituency to be
represented by him. Undoubtedly, the right to hold
such a post is statutory and no person can claim
any absolute or vested right to the post, but he
cannot be removed without strictly adhering to the
provisions provided by the legislature for his
removal (vide Jyoti Basu v. Debi Ghosal, MohanLal
Tripathi v. District Magistrate, Rae Bareily and
Ram Beti v. District Panchayat Raj Adhikari).
Mohan Lal Tripathi vs District Magistrate, Rae Bareilly And ... on 15 May, 1992
35. The elected official is accountable to its
electorate because he is being elected by a large
number of voters. His removal has serious
repercussions as he is removed from the post and
declared disqualified to contest the elections for a
further stipulated period, but it also takes away the
right of the people of his constituency to be
represented by him. Undoubtedly, the right to hold
such a post is statutory and no person can claim
any absolute or vested right to the post, but he
cannot be removed without strictly adhering to the
provisions provided by the legislature for his
removal (vide Jyoti Basu v. Debi Ghosal, MohanLal
Tripathi v. District Magistrate, Rae Bareily and
Ram Beti v. District Panchayat Raj Adhikari).
Sunil Daulat Patil vs The State Of Maharashtra on 4 December, 2013
18] In the case of Sunil Daulat Patil Vs. The State of
Maharashtra & others in Writ Petition No.3419 of 2013,
decided on 04.12.2013 it has been held as follows in para
nos.14 and 15 :
Shri. Manohar S/O Atmaram Fiske vs The State Of Maha. Thr The Collector, ... on 30 September, 2020
27. Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner has relied on
Manohar (supra) and, more particularly, on paragraphs 16 to 19
therein. The same read as under :-
1