The Bombay High Court has affirmed that the required 3/4th majority under Section 35 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act must be rounded up to the next whole number when resulting in a fractional figure. This upholds administrative rigor and is binding precedent for Maharashtra Village Panchayat proceedings.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WP/4572/2024 of SIYANAND S/O MULCHAND THAKRE AND OTHERS Vs THE COLLECTOR, GONDIA AND OTHERS |
| CNR | HCBM040193212024 |
| Date of Registration | 03-08-2024 |
| Decision Date | 15-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISMISSED |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SIDDHESHWAR SUNDARRAO THOMBRE |
| Court | Bombay High Court |
| Bench | Single Judge Bench – Nagpur Bench |
| Precedent Value | Binding authority on Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act proceedings |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms decision of the District Collector |
| Type of Law | Local Government Law / Panchayat Law |
| Questions of Law | How should fractional 3/4th majorities be calculated under Section 35 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act? |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The Court held that when calculating 3/4th of total Village Panchayat members for the purpose of a “no confidence motion,” if the result is a fraction, it must be rounded up to the next whole integer. Since 3/4th of 7 is 5.25, the requirement rounds up to 6 supporting votes. A motion supported by only 5 votes out of 7 does not meet the statutory threshold. The Collector’s action in setting aside the motion due to insufficient majority was thus correct and legal. |
| Judgments Relied Upon | Not specified in the judgment |
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court |
|
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
Petitioners initiated a “no confidence” motion against Sarpanch and Upsarpanch. In a special meeting, 5 out of 7 members voted for the motion. Sarpanch and Upsarpanch challenged this before the District Collector under Section 35(3B), arguing that the statutory majority was not achieved. The Collector set aside the motion, holding that 3/4th of 7 (i.e., 5.25) must be rounded up to 6, thus 5 votes were insufficient. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts and administrative authorities applying Section 35 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act |
| Persuasive For | Other State authorities and High Courts interpreting analogous statutory majority provisions |
| Follows | Administrative logic as applied by the District Collector |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- The judgment affirms that where a required statutory majority under Section 35 is a fraction, the figure must be rounded up to the nearest whole number, not rounded down or ignored.
- Lawyers should advise clients that passing a “no confidence” motion in a Panchayat with 7 members requires at least 6 votes, not 5.
- The formula impacts all similar majority calculations under the Act for Panchayats with small memberships.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court reviewed Section 35 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, which requires a 3/4th majority to pass a “no confidence” motion.
- With 7 total members, 3/4th equals 5.25, resulting in a fractional number.
- The Court held that the statutory majority requirement cannot be satisfied by a fraction of a member; thus, the next whole number—6—must be achieved.
- This method supports clarity and certainty in the application of majority requirements within statutory local government proceedings.
- The Collector’s setting aside of the motion, since only 5 members voted for it, was proper and lawful.
- No contrary judicial precedents or alternative interpretations were indicated or relied upon.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioners:
- Claimed that the no confidence motion was validly passed by a majority (5 out of 7) in the special meeting.
Respondents (Sarpanch, Upsarpanch, and State):
- Contended before the District Collector that 3/4th of 7 is 5.25, thus requiring at least 6 votes for valid passage.
- Supported the Collector’s decision that less than 6 votes is insufficient.
Factual Background
The petitioners moved a motion of “no confidence” against the Sarpanch and Upsarpanch of a Village Panchayat. A special meeting was held, and 5 out of 7 members supported the motion. The Sarpanch and Upsarpanch challenged the result before the District Collector under Section 35(3B) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, arguing that the vote failed to meet the 3/4th majority requirement. The Collector upheld this argument and set aside the motion.
Statutory Analysis
- The judgment analyzed Section 35 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act.
- Section 35 mandates that a “no confidence” motion must be passed by a 3/4th majority of the total Panchayat members.
- The Court interpreted this to mean that any fractional result (here, 5.25) must be rounded up to the next whole number (6), not rounded down or disregarded.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The judgment upholds and clarifies the application of statutory majority requirements, reinforcing existing norms under the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act.