Oral Judgment:

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of parties.

2. Heard learned counsel for respective parties.

3. By way of present petition, the petitioner assails the order dated 31.01.2023 passed by the learned Collector, Latur in File No.2022/GPN/CR-53 and order dated 10.04.2023 passed by the learned Additional Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad in File No. GP/Appeal/Cell/CR-11/2023.

4. Mr. Umakant Deshmukh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner got elected in the year 2021 as a member of Gram Panchayat. After she got elected, respondent no.4 filed a complaint before the Collector by pointing out that on account of having third child after cut-off date i.e. 12.09.2001, the petitioner incurred disqualification under Section 14 (j-1) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act. Mr. Deshmukh further submits that before the Collector, admittedly, two records were submitted, one is maintained by Gram Panchayat and other is maintained by the school. As per Gram Panchayat record is concerned, the date of birth of second child Adinath is recorded as 21.10.2000 and third child Komal is recorded as 12.08.2001 and as the Gram Panchayat record is having presumptive value and therefore, the Collector ought not to have relied upon the school record. As far as school record is concerned, he submits that as per primary school record, the date of birth of second child Adinath is recorded as 14.04.2002 and third child Komal is recorded as 15.03.2003. He further points out that in secondary school record also, there is variance as far as third child is concerned whose date of birth is recorded as 01.06.2004. Therefore, he submits that pursuant to the complaint, the Collector directed the block development officer to conduct an inquiry and after verifying the record, the block development officer submits that in the Gram Panchayat record, the entry about date of birth is correctly mentioned but during the inquiry, the then gram sevaks who were holding the post at the relevant time i.e. in 2001, they denied the signature on the record and entry made in the record.

5. Therefore, he submits that when such statements were made, the authority ought to have referred the same to the handwriting expert. Even the petitioner filed an application before the Collector with a prayer that those documents are required to be referred for handwriting expert. He further submits that the disqualification under Section 14 (j-1) is for life and therefore, the moment disqualification order is confirmed, the petitioner is being disqualified for the entire life and she will not be entitled to contest the election further. Therefore, he submits that the impugned orders be set aside and matter be remanded back by directing the Collector to refer the documents to the handwriting expert.

6. Per contra, learned AGP and learned counsel for respondent no.3 supports the order passed by both the authorities.

7. Having gone through the record which was placed along with the writ petition, there is no dispute about the fact that the school record depicts the date of birth of the second child Adinath as 14.04.2002 and third Child Komal as 15.03.2003. As far as the Gram Panchayat records is concerned which is placed along with the petition at page no.79 and 80, after going through the record, it reveals that the date of registration of said certificates was mentioned as 06.06.2022 and on the same day, it was stated that the certificate was issued. Though in the said record the date of birth was mentioned as 21.10.2000 as far as second child Adinath is concerned and third child Komal, the date of birth was mentioned as 12.08.2001. If both certificates are perused, it reveals that on the same day i.e. 06.06.2022, both certificates were registered.

8. Herein the case, the petitioner got elected in the month of January 2021 and therefore, after she got elected on the post of Sarpanch, it seems that she has registered the birth certificates in the Gram Panchayat record after she got elected. More particularly, when the school record clearly reveals date of birth of both the child as 14.04.2002 and 15.03.2003 having presumptive value and therefore, both the authorities have considered that the petitioner is having third child after the cut-off date i.e. 12.09.2001. Admittedly, as per school record, the petitioner is having a second child after cut-off date i.e. 14.04.2002 and third child on 15.03.2003. As far as Gram Panchayat record is concerned that was registered subsequently with a view to escape from disqualification. Therefore, I have to accept the school record which is having a presumptive value.

9. In view thereof, I do not find any perversity in the orders passed by both the authorities, and I do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the Collector and Additional Divisional Commissioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the following order is passed

ORDER

(I) The petition is dismissed.

(II) No order as to cost.

(III) Rule is discharged.