Shri. Punjabrao Trambakrao ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Rural ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 7900 Bom

                                                                                                                            wp.6462.17
                                                                       1


                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                         BENCH AT NAGPUR, NAGPUR.
                                                    ...

                                             WRIT PETITION NO. 6462/2017

            Shri Punjabrao Trambakrao Deshmukh
            Aged 51 years, occu: Agriculture
            Res. At & Po: Linga Kotwal
            Tah.Risod, Dist.Washim 444 506.                                           ..                      PETITIONER


                        versus

1)          State of Maharashtra
            Rural Development Department
            Mantralya, Mumbai.

2)          The Collector, Washim
            Tah. & Dist. Washim.

3)          The Returning officer
            Tahsil Office, Risod, Dist.Washim.                                                      ..         RESPONDENTS
...............................................................................................................................................
            Mr. U.P. Deopujari, Advocate for the petitioner
            Mr. N.S.Rao, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 3
................................................................................................................................................

                                                                           CORAM: B.P. DHARAMDHIKARI &
                                                                                  MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.

DATED: 6th October, 2017

ORAL JUDGMENT: (PER B.P.DHARMADHUIKARI, J.)

1. Rule. Rule, made returnable forthwith. Heard finally.

2. Heard submissions. Nominations of petitioner for post of Ward-Member

was initially accepted during scrutiny. Thereafter without any notice and behind his

back, it has been rejected. Submission, such a power of modification or review cannot

wp.6462.17

be exercised by respondent no.3.

3. Learned AGP submits that petitioner was disqualified for not submitting

election expenses of election conducted in 2012. Our attention is drawn to order dated

30th March 2012 wherein such disqualification has been ordered and petitioner is also

declared disqualified for contesting election for next five years. The name of petitioner

appears at Sr.No.22 in Risod Tq. against Gram Panchayat Linga Kotwal.

4. This order has attained finality.

5. In this circumstances, it is apparent that petitioner himself could not

have submitted nomination and its wrongful or inadvertent acceptance by Returning

Officer cannot cloathe him with any legal right. It appears that Returning Officer has

corrected the error after learning about it.

6. In this situation, if the technical contention raised by Adv. Deopujari is

accepted, it will lead to restoration of an illegality. A writ cannot be issued in such

circumstances. No case is therefore made out. The Writ Petition is dismissed. Rule

discharged. No costs.

                          JUDGE                                JUDGE

sahare