Bombay High Court
Hargovind Hiraman Lanjewar vs The Collector, Bhandara And ... on 12 April, 2016
Bench: S.B. Shukre
J-wp1986.16.odt 1/4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION No.1986 OF 2016
Hargovind Hiraman Lanjewar,
Aged 32 years,
Occupation : Agriculturist,
Resident of Tiddi, Post Manegaon,
Tahsil and District Bhandara. : PETITIONER
...VERSUS...
1. The Collector, Bhandara.
2. The Tahsildar, Bhandara. : RESPONDENTS
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Mr. B.M. Kharkate, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. V.P. Maldhure, Asstt. Government Pleader for the Respondents.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
CORAM : S.B. SHUKRE, J.
th
DATE : 12
APRIL, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard
finally by consent of learned Counsel appearing for the parties.
2. By this petition, the petitioner has taken an exception to
the formation of wards and divisions for the purposes of first
J-wp1986.16.odt 2/4
general election of village panchayat of Tiddi.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
objectios were taken by the petitioner regarding formation of
divisions and wards on the ground that same has not been done by
following the principles of geographical and physical contiguity,
equal population, maintaining of the same ratio between number of
candidates to be elected and the population of the wards in respect
of all the divisions and wards and wrongly reserving division No.1
for a candidate belonging to the Scheduled Caste. According to
him, these objections were not appropriately considered by the
respondent No.1 and the result was that an erroneous order was
passed on 18th February, 2016 by him rejecting all the objections.
4. Learned A.G.P. for the respondents supporting the
impugned order states that the impugned order has been based
upon the population figures of 2011 Census and also the report of
the Tahsildar prepared on the basis of spot inspection report
submitted by Naib Tahsildar, Circle Officer Pahela and Talathi
Manegaon. He submits that the factual basis of the impugned order
has not been shown to be incorrect by the petitioner and, therefore,
the petition deserves to be dismissed.
5. Upon going through the grounds taken in the petition
J-wp1986.16.odt 3/4
and also the reasons stated by the respondent No.1 in the impugned
order, I find great substance in the argument of learned A.G.P. for
the State and no merit in the petition. The impugned order is based
upon the population figures drawn from 2011 Census and same has
not been shown to be incorrect by placing on record any certified
copy of 2011 Census. In order to support the contention that these
figures are wrong, the petitioner has drawn my attention to the
certificates issued by Head-Master of Zilla Parishad Primary School
disclosing that the population of members of the scheduled caste
was much less in all the divisions than what has been shown in the
impugned order. These certificates filed on record at Page 20,21
and 22 do not make any mention about the document from which
the extracts of figures of population of different categories/castes
have been prepared. Therefore, no reliance could be placed upon
these documents and in the absence of any other document, it
cannot be said that the factual basis of the impugned order is
erroneous.
6. It is also seen from the impugned order that the principle
of geographical contiguity has also been appropriately followed in
the instant case. Therefore, at this stage, it cannot be said that the
impugned order is illegal or arbitrary.
J-wp1986.16.odt 4/4
7. In the result, writ petition, deserves to be dismissed.
8. Writ Petition stands dismissed.
9. No order as to costs.
10. Rule is discharged.
JUDGE
okMksns
