1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by the consent of the parties.
2. The petitioners and respondent No.4 are the elected members of village panchayat. The post of the Sarpanch of village panchayat was not reserved. It was for general open. Respondent No.4 was elected as a Sarpanch of the village. A notice under Section 35(1) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act ("Panchayats Act" for short) for convening the meeting of no confidence against respondent No.4 was moved to the Tahsildar on 19.07.2023. Pursuant to the said notice, the Tahsildar convened the meeting on 25.07.2023 by issuing a notice to all members entitled to sit and vote in the meeting. There were 11 members of village panchayat. 9 members out of 11 attended the meeting and no confidence motion was 5 WP.9745-23.odt passed against respondent No.4 by 7:2. The Tahsildar declared that the no confidence motion against respondent No.4 is failed for the reasons that requisite 3/4th majority of the members entitled to vote was not there. He has observed that 3/4th of 11 members comes 8.25. Its fraction is 9. Therefore, it was not the passed by requisite majority. The petitioners have impugned the decision of the Tahsildar before this Court.