1 14-wp-245-2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 245 OF 2023 Purushottam Pundalik Tayade And Others VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary And Others ... Mr. Mahesh Bhosale, Advocate for the Petitioners Mr. S. N. Kendre, AGP for Respondent-State Ms. M. V. Narwade, Advocate for Respondent nos.3 and 4 ….. CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J. DATED : 31ST AUGUST, 2026 P.C. :- . On 11.07.2018, a complaint was made to the Hon’ble Lokayukta and Deputy Lokayukta, State of Maharashtra by one Fakirchand Kedari Khandekar i.e. the present respondent no.7. The complaint was filed on account of failure of the then Chief Executive Officer, Deputy Chief Executive Officer and the Block Development Officer of Zilla Parishad, Jalna to inquire into the encroachment caused at the behest of the then Sarpanch namely Sangita Laxman Shinde over 40R government and gaothan land at village Tembhurni, Tahsil, Jafrabad, District Jalna. Apparently, the petitioners were not made party to the said complaint. 2026:BHC-AUG:39769 2 14-wp-245-2023 2. Subsequently, an inquiry was conducted and a confidential report was filed under Section 12(3) of the Maharashtra Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayuktas Act, 1971 wherein the concerned authorities were reported to have committed deficiencies and negligence in preventing encroachment upon Government and Gaothan lands. It was therefore reported that further inquiry be completed by the Competent Authority within a stipulated period and their compliance report be filed in the Lokayukta Office under Section 12(4) of the Act of 1971. Feeling aggrieved thereby, the petitioners are before this Court. 3. Learned Advocate Mr. Mahesh bhosale, for the petitioners submits that pursuant to this order, the authorities of the Zilla Parishad initiated a departmental inquiry which resulted in the exoneration of all the petitioners. He further adds that although the petitioners were initially held responsible in the inquiry, they came to be exonerated thereafter. He candidly submits that exoneration order still holds the field. It is further contention of Mr. Bhosale that the illegal activities of which references have been given in the proceedings before the Lokayukta as also in the departmental 3 14-wp-245-2023 proceedings had evidently taken place when they were not posted at village Tembhurni during the relevant period. 4. Ms. M. V. Narwade, learned Advocate for the BDO has filed reply affidavit demonstrating the sequence of the facts. She would submits that the inquiry was properly conducted pursuant to the orders/report of the Hon’ble Lokayukta Office. 5. No one present for the complainant/respondent no.7. 6. In view of the fact that the petitioners are already exonerated from the charges levelled against them by the Zilla Parishad Authority, purportedly in the light of the report of the Hon’ble Lokayukta, the purpose of this petition stands served. 7. In view of the above, Writ Petition stands disposed of. ( AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J. ) Rushikesh/2026