Bombay High Court
Ranjita W/O. Narasing ... vs The Returning Officer Of The Gram ... on 17 November, 2017
Bench: Z.A. Haq
1 wp3993.2015.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Writ Petition No. 3993/2015
1] Ranjita W/o Narasing Amarshettiwar
Aged 36 years, Occ. Household,
R/o Prabhag No. 2, At PO: Patanbori,
Tq. Kelapur, Dist. Yavatmal
..... PETITIONER
...V E R S U S...
1] The Returning Officer of the
Gram Panchayat Election 2015 of
Patanbori Tq. Kelapur,
Dist. Yavatmal
2] Anita Ramesh Bolenwar,
Aged- Major, Occ. Household,
R/o Prabhag No. 2, At PO: Patanbori,
Tq. Kelapur, Dist. Yavatmal
3] Anusaya Ramesh Adwalwar,
Aged- Major, Occ. Household,
R/o Prabhag No. 2, At PO: Patanbori,
Tq. Kelapur, Dist. Yavatmal
... RESPONDENT
S
=====================================
Shri M.I. Dhatrak, Advocate for the petitioner
Miss K.R. Deshpande, AGP for the respondent no. 1
=====================================
CORAM:- Z.A. HAQ,J.
DATED :- 17 November
th
,
201
7
ORAL JUDGMENT :-
Heard.
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
::: Uploaded on - 24/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 25/11/2017 00:44:06 :::
2 wp3993.2015.odt
2] The petitioner submitted her nomination form offering her
candidature at the election of the Gram Panchayat scheduled on
25/06/2015. The petitioner intended to contest election from Prabhag
4-B reserved for the backward class candidates. The nomination form
of the petitioner came to be rejected on the ground that the petitioner
had not submitted the documents to show that her claim for caste
validity certificate was pending before the Caste Scrutiny Committee.
Being aggrieved by the order passed by the returning officer rejecting
the nomination form, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.
3] According to the petitioner, at the time of scrutiny, she had
submitted the acknowledgment dated 09/07/2015 showing that the
petitioner has submitted her caste certificate alongwith papers for
scrutiny of the caste certificate. To support the contention, the learned
advocate for the petitioner has submitted that there is interpolation in
the order, that her nomination form was initially accepted, however,
subsequently it is rejected. It is submitted the returning officer had
remarked " lnj ukefunZs'ku lkscr tkriMrkGh lehrhdMs validity vtZ ikBoY;kph
ikspikorh tksMysyh ukgh egkjk"Vª xzkeiapk;r vf/kfu;e 1958 ps dye 10-1v vUo;s voS/k
Bjfo.;kr vkys vkgs". It is further submitted that the petitioner again
submitted the copy of the caste certificate at the time of scrutiny,
alongwith the application dated 13/07/2015 which was received by the
::: Uploaded on - 24/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 25/11/2017 00:44:06 :::
3 wp3993.2015.odt
returning officer at 4:10 p.m.
4] Though the returning officer has denied the allegations
made by the petitioner about interpolation in the impugned order, there
is no denial to the fact that the copy of the caste certificate is submitted
by the petitioner on 13/07/2015 at 4:10 p.m. There is an endorsement
at the foot of the application submitted by the petitioner on
13/07/2015 is put up by the returning officer acknowledging the
receipt of the application at 4:10 p.m and the application contains the
averment that caste certificate was submitted. It is undisputed that the
scrutiny of the nomination forms was fixed on 13/07/2015 and was
required to be conducted till 5:00 p.m.
5] As the petitioner has proved that she had submitted the
copy of the caste certificate at the time of scrutiny, in my view, the
nomination form of the petitioner could not have been rejected.
6] By an interim order passed by this Court on 15/07/2015, it
was directed that the nomination form of the petitioner be provisionally
accepted and the name of the petitioner be included in the list of validly
nominated candidates and symbol be allotted to her. This Court ordered
that the result of the elections should not be declared until further
orders. The advocate for the petitioner and the AGP have submitted that
::: Uploaded on - 24/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 25/11/2017 00:44:06 :::
4 wp3993.2015.odt
the petitioner is permitted to contest the elections, however, the result
of the elections is not declared.
In view of the above facts, the following order is passed:-
O R D E R
1] The impugned order of the returning
officer rejecting the nomination form of the petitioner
is quashed.
2] The returning officer shall consider that the
nomination form of the petitioner is accepted.
3] The result of the election be declared
immediately.
The writ petition is allowed in the above terms. In the
circumstances, the parties to bear their own costs.
JUDGE
A n s a r i
