Judgment 1 wp6339.17.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO.6339 OF 2017
Sau. Pushpa Baliram Kale,
aged about 48 years, Occupation : Housewife,
R/o. At Post Bhatumra, Tahsil : Washim,
District : Washim.
.... PETITIONER.
// VERSUS //
Returning Officer/ Tahsildar,
Gram Panchayat Election,
Tahsil Office, Washim,
District : Washim.
.... RESPONDENT
.
___________________________________________________________________
Shri S.D.Chande, Advocate for Petitioner.
Ms M.A.Barabde, A.G.P. for Respondent.
___________________________________________________________________
CORAM : S.C.GUPTE, J.
DATED : AUGUST 26, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.P. for the respondent.
2. Issue notice to the respondent, returnable forthwith. Learned A.G.P. waives notice on behalf of the respondent.
::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/09/2017 01:40:37 :::
Judgment 2 wp6339.17.odt
3. RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. Taken up for hearing by consent of the parties.
4. The subject matter of controversy in the present petition is rejection of the petitioner's nomination form for election to the post of member of Gram Panchayat, Bhatumra, Tahsil and District : Washim. The petitioner has applied for the seat reserved for Other Backward Classes. Her nomination form was rejected by the respondent, who is Returning Officer for the elections, on the ground that the petitioner only submitted a Caste Certificate issued by the competent authority and not Validity Certificate issued by the Scrutiny Committee. The respondent held that the petitioner merely submitted a copy of receipt of payment made to the Scrutiny Committee for the Caste Validity Certificate. The respondent appears to be of the view that at the time of submission of nomination form, the candidate is required to submit true copies of both the caste certificates issued by the competent authority as well as validity certificate issued by the Scrutiny Committee.
5. Section 10-1A inserted by the Maharashtra Act No.37 of 2006 in the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1958 and as amended by the Maharashtra Village Panchayats (Amendment) Act, 2016 (Mah. Act No.10 of 2016) on 31/03/2016, requires that in the case of any general or by-election for which the last date of filing of nomination falls on or before the 31 st December, 2017, in accordance with the election programme declared by the ::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/09/2017 01:40:37 ::: Judgment 3 wp6339.17.odt State Election Commission, a person who has applied to the Scrutiny Committee for verification of his Caste Certificate before the date of filing of the nomination papers but who has not received the Validity Certificate on the date of filing of the nomination paper, shall submit, along with the nomination papers, a true copy of the application preferred by him to the Scrutiny Committee for issuance of the Validity Certificate or any other proof of having made such application to the Scrutiny Committee and an undertaking that he shall submit, within a period of six months from the date on which he is declared elected, the Validity Certificate issued by the Scrutiny Committee. By this proviso, the original requirement forming part of the main provision in Section 10-1A of the Act, which requires submission of both Caste Certificate and the Validity Certificate along with nomination papers has been varied in the cases provided for therein. The petitioner has applied to the Scrutiny Committee for verification of his caste certificate. There is proof on record that such application is submitted before the date of filing of nomination papers. Since the petitioner has not received her Validity Certificate as on the date of filing of the nomination papers, she has submitted proof of having made an application to the Scrutiny Committee for issuance of such Validity Certificate and also submitted an undertaking in the prescribed format for submission of the Validity Certificate that may be issued by the Scrutiny Committee, within a period of six months from the date on which she is declared elected. Since the petitioner accordingly fulfills all the requirements of Section 10-1A of the Act, her nomination form ::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/09/2017 01:40:37 ::: Judgment 4 wp6339.17.odt could not have been rejected by the respondent. In view of the amended law, noted above, the impugned order of rejection passed by the respondent cannot be sustained and will have to be interfered with in the writ jurisdiction of this Court.
6. Accordingly, Rule is made absolute by quashing and setting aside the impugned order of rejection passed by the respondent on 25 th September, 2017 and directing the respondent to accept the nomination form of the petitioner on the basis of the documents submitted by her and allow her to participate in and contest the elections.
7. The petition is disposed of in the above terms. No order as to costs.
8. All the parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order.
JUDGE RRaut..
::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/09/2017 01:40:37 :::