JUDGMENT : S.S. Shinde, J. Rule. Rule made returnable with the consent of counsel appearing for the parties and petition is being heard finally. 2. This writ petition takes an exception to the order dated 7th December 2018 passed by the respondent no.3. - Divisional Commissioner, Pune below Grampanchayat Appeal bearing No. 9 of 2018 whereby the respondent 3 was pleased to allow the appeal filed by the respondent no.4 and quashed and set aside the judgment and order dated 12.06.2018 passed by respondent no.2. Hence this Writ Petition. 3. The brief facts, leading for filing present Writ Petition, as stated in the memo of petition, are as under :- (I) The petitioners are the members of the Grampanchayat Gondi (Ozre) Taluka Indapur, Dist. Pune. In the said Grampanchayat 9 members were elected on 30th June 2015. The respondent no.4 was elected as Sarpanch from the said 9 members on 22nd August 2015. (II) It is the case of the petitioner that, the respondent no.4 tendered his resignation of the post of Sarpanch in the prescribed form to respondent no.5 Chairman of Panchayat Samiti Indapur. On 5 th April 2018 the respondent no.5 - Chairman of Panchayat Samiti, Indapur, issued letter to Gramsevak of the said Panchayat directing him to take appropriate steps in respect of resignation tendered by respondent no.4 as per the provisions of Village Panchayat Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act"), Rules and Procedure thereunder. (III) Pursuant to receipt of said letter by the Gramsevak of the said Grampanchayat, the meeting of the members of the panchayat was fixed on 18th April 2018, thereby intimating to all the panchayat members by issuing notice dated 12th April 2018 about the meeting to be conducted on 18th April 2018 to discuss about said resignation tendered by respondent no.4. The notices issued to the members was signed by respondent no.1 and also by respondent no.4. Such notices were also received by the petitioners herein. Upon reading of the contents of the said notice it reveals that, the agenda of said meeting was to discuss about the resignation tendered by respondent no.4. The said notice was duly served upon all members and also same was received by all the members. Such notices were also received by the petitioners herein. Upon reading of the contents of the said notice it reveals that, the agenda of said meeting was to discuss about the resignation tendered by respondent no.4. The said notice was duly served upon all members and also same was received by all the members. (IV) Accordingly, on 18.04.2018 a meeting took place and in the said meeting the subject of discussion of resignation of respondent no.4 from the post of Sarpanch, was proposed by respondent no.7 Sangita Sul and same was seconded by respondent no.8 Rani Jadhav. In the said meeting the respondent no.4, specifically stated that the said resignation is given by him with free will and not under any kind of pressure. After discussion the resolution was passed and resignation tendered by respondent no.4 from the post of Sarpanch was accepted. (V) It is further the case of the petitioners that on 25th April 2018 the respondent no.4 issued a letter to respondent no.2 - Additional Collector Pune raising a dispute about his resignation on the ground that, the said resignation was tendered under political pressure and respondent no.4 had no desire to tender such resignation and therefore such alleged resignation may not be accepted, since not acceptable to respondent no.4. (VI) On 26th April 2018 the respondent no.1 Gramsevak submitted a report to respondent no.2 Collector regarding the proceedings of meeting held on 18th May 2018 and decision taken in said meeting accepting the resignation tendered by respondent no.4. (VII) It is further the case of the petitioner that, on 17th May 2018 the petitioner no.1 made an application to respondent no.2 - Collector thereby requesting to add all the members as a party to the dispute raised by the respondent no.4. Accordingly, respondent no.2 was pleased to add respondent Nos. 7 to 11 and petitioners as party respondents. The petitioners filed their reply to the said dispute application bearing no. 45 of 2018 which was filed by respondent no.4, thereby disputing the contents of the said dispute application. Accordingly, respondent no.2 was pleased to add respondent Nos. 7 to 11 and petitioners as party respondents. The petitioners filed their reply to the said dispute application bearing no. 45 of 2018 which was filed by respondent no.4, thereby disputing the contents of the said dispute application. (VIII) The respondent no.2 - Collector after hearing all the concerned parties by its order dated 12th June 2018 under Section 29(3) of the said Act, was pleased to dismiss the dispute application filed by respondent no.4 observing that the said resignation tendered by respondent no.4 was proper and genuine and accordingly the said resignation was accepted by the District Collector. (IX) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the order passed by the Collector, respondent no.4 filed Grampanchayat Appeal bearing No. 9 of 2018 before the respondent no.3 i.e. Divisional Commissioner. The respondent no.4 tendered written notes of arguments before the respondent no.3 in the aforesaid proceedings of Appeal No.9 of 2018. The petitioners herein also filed the reply/written notes of arguments in the said appeal and stay application filed by respondent no.4 and disputed the contents raised in the said application. (X) It is further case of the petitioner that, the respondent no.3 by the impugned judgment and order dated 7th December 2018 allowed the appeal filed by respondent no.4. Hence this Writ Petition challenging the said order. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submit that, respondent no.3 has wrongly observed that the dispute is raised by respondent no.4 within 7 days from the date of resignation. The respondent no.3 contrary to the record has observed that the signatures of the witnesses appearing on the resignation tendered by respondent no.4, are not their signatures. It is submitted that the respondent no.4 never raised an issue in the Grampanchayat meeting held on 18th April 2018, that the said resignation has been tendered by him under political pressure. It is submitted that there was no material brought on record by respondent no.4 before the respondent no.3 to hold that, there was political pressure and under such pressure respondent no.4 had tendered resignation. It is submitted that, it was assertion of respondent no.4 that, he did not tender the resignation and therefore onus of proving the fact that the resignation tendered by respondent no.4 was not voluntary and same was under political pressure was on respondent no.4. It is submitted that, it was assertion of respondent no.4 that, he did not tender the resignation and therefore onus of proving the fact that the resignation tendered by respondent no.4 was not voluntary and same was under political pressure was on respondent no.4. However, said burden has not been discharged by respondent no.4. Respondent no.4 tendered his resignation on 02.04.2018, however, the dispute was raised first time after 23 days. Respondent no.4 remained silent for about 23 days. The said silence of respondent no.4 for 23 days has not been explained by him. Without admitting but assuming that the respondent nos.7 and 8 have disputed their signatures, however, the said alleged act of disputing signatures on behalf of respondent nos. 7 & 8 has been raised after laps of one month from the date of meeting held on 18th April 2018. It is submitted that, out of 9 panchayat members, more than half of the Grampanchayat members are against the respondent no.4 and therefore, respondent no.4 had no right to continue on the post of Sarpanch. 5. The learned counsel invites attention of this Court to the pleadings and grounds taken in the petition and annexures thereto, reasons assigned by the District Collector while rejecting the dispute application filed by respondent no.4, and while accepting the resignation of respondent no.4, and submits that petition deserves to be allowed. 6. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.4 relying upon the averments in the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the respondent no.4 made following submissions :- 7. On 22.08.2015, Respondent No.4 was elected as Sarpanch of the Grampanchayat Gondi (Ozre) unopposed. Respondent no.4 tendered his resignation on 02.04.2018. Thereafter, the Chairman, Panchayat Samiti, has issued a letter dated 05.04.2018 addressed to Gramsevak directing him to take appropriate steps on the resignation of the respondent no.4. Accordingly, on 12.04.2018 notice was issued for the meeting which was scheduled to be held on 18.04.2018. On 18.04.2018 meeting was conducted by the Grampanchayat Gondi (Ozre). Respondent no.4 raised dispute before the District Collector Pune on 25.04.2018 under Section 29(3) read with Section 34 of the said Act. Respondent nos. 7 & 8 wrote a letter to the Collector on 02.05.2018 pointing out that they had not made any signatures on the alleged resignation dated 02.04.2018. On 05.06.2018, respondent no.4 Sarpanch filed written arguments before the District Collector. Respondent nos. 7 & 8 wrote a letter to the Collector on 02.05.2018 pointing out that they had not made any signatures on the alleged resignation dated 02.04.2018. On 05.06.2018, respondent no.4 Sarpanch filed written arguments before the District Collector. Thereafter, respondent no.7, 8 & 10 also filed written arguments before the District Collector. On 12.06.2018, the District Collector rejected the dispute. It is submitted that, Respondent No.4 approached the Divisional Commissioner, Pune by way of filing an Appeal. Thereafter respondent no.4 filed written arguments on 12.10.2018. The Divisional Commissioner, Pune allowed the said appeal of the respondent no.4 on 07.12.2018. Therefore, the learned counsel for respondent no.4 relying upon the reasons recorded by the respondent no.3 in its impugned order submits that petition may be rejected. 8. I have given careful consideration to the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.4 and learned AGP appearing for the State and its officials. With their able assistance, perused the pleadings and grounds taken in the petition and annexures thereto, reply filed by respondent no.4, reasons assigned by the Collector in his order and also by respondent no.3 in the impugned judgment and order. 9. Upon perusal of the documents placed on record, it appears that at the relevant time respondent no.4 was working as Sarpanch of the said Grampanchayat and had tendered resignation from the said post on 2nd April 2018 to respondent no.5-Chairman of Panchayat Samiti, Indapur. It further appears that the Grampanchayat meeting was conducted on 18th April 2018. It further appears that other Grampanchayat members and also Sarpanch attended the said meeting. The fact that said meeting was attended by respondent no.4 is not in dispute. It further appears that, on 18th April 2018 the resolution was passed by members of Grampanchayat, thereby accepting the resignation tendered by respondent no.4. It reveals from reading the contents of letter written by respondent no.4 to District Collector Pune on 25th April 2018 that the resignation tendered by respondent no.4 from the post of Sarpanch was given by him under pressure. It is stated in the said letter that, the application filed by him to the District Collector be treated as an appeal, and the prayer of the respondent no.4, not to accept said resignation may be granted. It is stated in the said letter that, the application filed by him to the District Collector be treated as an appeal, and the prayer of the respondent no.4, not to accept said resignation may be granted. It would be apt to reproduce herein below the contents of the said letter, which reads as under :- xxx xxx xxx 10. Upon careful perusal of the contents of the aforesaid letter, it is clear that, respondent no.4 has not mentioned under whose political pressure he had tendered resignation from the post of Sarpanch. The contents of the aforesaid letter are general in nature. It is not mentioned in the said letter that, the signatures of two Grampanchayat members on the said resignation tendered on 2nd April 2018 by respondent no.4, were not given by those two members. 11. The District Collector, Pune while deciding the dispute application filed by the petitioners, upon perusal of the written submission filed by respondent no.4, and also taking into consideration oral submissions and perusal of documents placed on record, held that respondent no.4 had tendered resignation on 2nd April 2018. There was discussion in the meeting held on 18th April 2018, about truthfulness of said resignation. It appears that the resignation tendered by respondent no.4 was his voluntary act and it was not under political pressure. The aforesaid conclusion reached by the District Collector, are based upon the appreciation of oral and written submissions and also on the basis of documents/material which was placed on record by the parties. The District Collector Pune, with reasoned order rejected the dispute application filed by the respondent no.4, and accepted the resignation tendered by respondent no.4. 12. In an appeal/revision filed by the respondent no.4, respondent no.3 after appreciating the rival contentions and relevant records held that the resignation tendered by respondent no.4 was not his voluntary act, and the said resignation is tendered due to political reasons. In order to properly appreciate the reasons and finding record by the respondent no.3 in his judgment, it would be apt to reproduce herein below the relevant part of the reasoning, which reads as under :- xxx xxx xxx 13. If the aforesaid reasons/discussions/conclusions are carefully perused, there is no specific reference given by the said authority to hold that due to political pressure respondent no.4 had tendered resignation from the post of Sarpanch. If the aforesaid reasons/discussions/conclusions are carefully perused, there is no specific reference given by the said authority to hold that due to political pressure respondent no.4 had tendered resignation from the post of Sarpanch. It is also relevant to mention that respondent no.3 has entered into exercises of comparing signatures of some of the members of Grampanchayat appearing on the said resignation and other alleged documents signed by them. This Court is of the opinion that, it was not desirable to undertake such exercise by respondent no.3. There is no basis to hold that the resignation of respondent no.4 was against his will, and due to political reasons. Respondent no.3 was obliged to appreciate the contention of respondent no.4, keeping in view the contents of dispute application tendered by him to the District Collector, Pune, and also other documents including proceedings of the meeting of Grampanchayat held on 18th April 2018. Respondent no.3 by assigning general reasons and without recording specific findings had accepted, the contentions of respondent no.4, that the resignation tendered by him from the post of Sarpanch was against his will and due to political reasons. 14. It was incumbent upon respondent no.3 to appreciate the material placed on record in its entirety, and if the said authority was of the opinion to reverse the findings given by first Appellate Authority i.e. District Collector Pune, in that case, specific reasons/findings ought to have been recorded to conclude that the resignation tendered by respondent no.4 was against his will and due to political reasons/pressure. 15. In that view of the matter an inevitable conclusion is that, the impugned order passed by respondent no.3 can not be legally sustained. However, in the facts and circumstances of this case, it would be appropriate to remit the matter back to the respondent no.3 for de novo consideration. 16. Accordingly, following order is passed :- (A) The impugned order dated 7th December 2018 passed by respondent no.3 is quashed and set aside. (B) The Grampanchayat Appeal No. 9 of 2018 is restored to its original file before respondent no.3 i.e. Divisional Commissioner, Pune for fresh consideration. (C) The parties to appear before respondent no.3 i.e. Divisional Commissioner, Pune on 13th June 2019. (B) The Grampanchayat Appeal No. 9 of 2018 is restored to its original file before respondent no.3 i.e. Divisional Commissioner, Pune for fresh consideration. (C) The parties to appear before respondent no.3 i.e. Divisional Commissioner, Pune on 13th June 2019. (D) Respondent no.3 to hear the parties on said date or fix the next date for hearing of aforesaid appeal, however, respondent no.3 shall ensure that the aforesaid appeal is heard and disposed of as expeditiously as possible, however, on or before 31st July 2019. (E) Till 31st July 2019, the respondent Authorities are directed to maintain status-quo as available on today, meaning thereby, whoever is occupying the post of Sarpanch shall be allowed to discharge the duties, by way of Ad-hoc arrangement till 31st July 2019. (F) Rule is made absolute in above terms. The Writ Petition is partly allowed and same is disposed of accordingly.