JUDGMENT:- Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the parties. 2. The petitioner is challenging the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Amravati, so also Additional Collector, Buldhana, by which they had upheld the 'no confidence motion' passed against the petitioner. 3. The petitioner is the Sarpanch of village Davargaon, having been elected as such in 2005. In the year 2008, on 24.6.2008, notice of 'no confidence motion' was given by 5 members of Gram Panchayat. It may be mentioned that there are 7 members in the said Gram Panchayat. The notices were issued to the members of the said Gram Panchayat including the petitioner. The copy of the notice issued to the petitioner is produced at page no.14 of this petition (Annexure-A). 4. According to the petitioner, as per the notice of 'no confidence motion' served on her, a special meeting for considering the said 'no confidence motion' was to be held at Gram Panchayat Office, Davargaon. However, the same was held at Room No.4 of Zilla Parishad School at Davargaon, Sindkhed Raja, Distt. Buldhana. According to the petitioner, the said place of the special meeting was not notified and as such the proceedings held in the said meeting were not legal. 5. The petitioner preferred a dispute before the Additional Collector, Buldhana. However, the Additional Collector, Buldhana, dismissed the complaint of the petitioner. He upheld the proceedings of 'no confidence motion', as conducted by the Tahsildar, Sindkhed Raja. 7. The petitioner then preferred an appeal before the Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati. The Additional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati, dismissed the said appeal by the impugned order. 8. The learned counsel for the petitioner while challenging the impugned order submitted that as the place of special meeting for considering the 'no confidence motion' was changed, and as the said meeting was not held on the place notified by the notice of 'no confidence motion' , the proceedings in the said meeting were illegal and therefore, are liable to be quashed, consequently the 'no confidence motion' too; passed against her. 9. As against this, learned A.G.P., has supported the order of the Additional Commissioner as well as the Additional Collector. 10. 9. As against this, learned A.G.P., has supported the order of the Additional Commissioner as well as the Additional Collector. 10. Learned counsel for Respondent Nos.4 to 8 supported the orders of the Additional Commissioner as well as Additional Collector, contending that as there was no Grarn Panchayat Office at village Davargaon, the meetings of the said Gram Panchayat were being usually held at Zilla Parishad Marathi School, Room No.4 at Davargaon. This meeting was also so held and the 'no confidence motion was passed therein. According to him, 5 members have supported the motion and only present petitioner & one other member did not support and therefore, the no confidence motion' was rightly carried. 11. In order to support his contention, he has relied on the judgment of this Court reported in 1999(1) Mh.L.J. 958 ; Sangeeta w/o. Ramesh Ranvir Vs. Presiding Officer/Tahsildar, Purna, wherein the facts were that, 'no confidence motion' against the Sarpanch was considered in the special meeting held in a room adjoining to the Panchayat Office as the Panchayat Office was undergoing some construction. It was held that in such circumstances, there was no contravention of any mandatory provision and there was sufficient compliance of sub-section 2 of Section 35 of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act. 12. In order to appreciate the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties, it is necessary to see the provisions of Rule 6 of the Bombay Village Panchayats (Meetings) Rules, which are pressed into service by the learned counsel for the petitioner, which read thus- "6. [(1)] A notice stating the date, time and place of every meeting of the panchayat and of the business to be transacted thereat, shall be placed on the notice-board at the office of the Panchayat. An announcement of the date of every meeting shall also be made by beat of drum in the village, and if there are more than one village in each of such villages, not later than the day immediately following the day on which the notice had been affixed as aforesaid. [(2) Every meeting of the Panchayat shall be held in the office of the Village Panchayat or the village Chavdi." According to the petitioner, as the place of special meeting which was notified in the notice• of 'no confidence motion', was changed, the proceedings held in that meeting cannot sustain at law. 13. [(2) Every meeting of the Panchayat shall be held in the office of the Village Panchayat or the village Chavdi." According to the petitioner, as the place of special meeting which was notified in the notice• of 'no confidence motion', was changed, the proceedings held in that meeting cannot sustain at law. 13. I have gone through the orders passed by the Additional Collector as well as by the Additional Commissioner. Learned Additional Commissioner, Amravati, has observed that the meeting was conducted as scheduled under the Chairmanship of Tahsildar. Motion was discussed and further observed that Sarpanch does not take other members into confidence. He has also observed that there was discussion and the voting was done by show of hands in which 5 members voted in favour of resolution and two against. He also observed that there was no merit in the contention of the applicant. 14. This is a case where all the members of the Gram Panchayat were present in the special meeting called for consideration of the 'no confidence motion' against the petitioner. None of them including the petitioner had raised any grievance as regards change of place of the special meeting called for consideration of no confidence motion. The Sarpanch/petitioner actively participated in the proceedings. In fact, discussions were held and thereafter the no confidence motion was passed. There appears no contention of the petitioner as regards any prejudice caused to her because of change of place of the meeting and therefore, the grievance of the petitioner cannot be entertained to sustain the relief claimed in the petition. 15. Apart from this, Respondent Nos.4 to 8 have produced a certificate of Secretary, Gram Panchayat to the effect that since there is no special building of Gram Panchayat, Davargan, and since availability of the building of Marathi Primary School at village Dagargaon, all the meetings of Gram Panchayat including Gram Sabha are being held there. Such meetings are held there since 1995. Such meetings are held there since 1995. In these circumstances, it is impossible to say that the petitioner who is a Sarpanch of the village, who had perhaps presided over the meetings held earlier; at the same place, should be allowed to come to the Court raising a grievance that because of the change of the place of meeting, she had suffered any prejudice because of change of place of the meeting, particularly when she & all other members of Gram Panchayat attended the meeting. Such type of belated and after thought grievances cannot be entertained. The petition, therefore, lacks merit. The same is, therefore, dismissed. No order as to costs. Interim relief stands vacated. Petition dismissed.