Rohidas Alias Baban Tukaram ... vs The State Election Commission ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 11973 Bom

                                                                          921.WP.10186.22.odt


                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                            BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                         921 WRIT PETITION NO.10186 OF 2022

               ROHIDAS ALIAS BABAN TUKARAM ZAMBARE
                              VERSUS
        THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION THROUGH COLLECTOR /
                   AUTHORIZED OFFICER AND OTHERS

                                         ...
                   Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Vithal M. Chate
               Advocate for Respondent No.1 : Mr. Ajit B. Kadethankar
                    AGP for Respondents: Ms. M.A. Deshpande
                                        ...

                                    CORAM   :    MANGESH S. PATIL AND
                                                 Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.

                                    DATE    :    22.11.2022
PER COURT :

         The petitioner is seeking following relief :

          B.     By issuing writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or

directions in the like nature, the respondent No.2 may please be directed to publish final notification with regard to the ensuing Grampanchayat Election of Village Hingani, Tq. Ashti, Dist. Beed as per the report submitted by Village Talathi dated 10.03.2022.

2. The learned advocate for the petitioner submits that in blatant

violation of the directions in the Bombay Village Panchayats (Number of

Members, Divisions into Wards and Reservation of Seats) Rules, 1966, wards

have been formed. Though the authority initially accepted the errors when

the petitioner had approached them, without indulging in verifying the facts

and undertaking any further scrutiny, the wards are being formed. He

submits that though the elections are about to be held, the relief being

921.WP.10186.22.odt

claimed is in aid of conducting fair election and this Court should exercise

the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Learned advocate

for the petitioner relied upon the following judgments :

a. Baburao Kalu Koli Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.;

2008 (1) AIR BOM R 763

b. Bhagwan Khushal Patil and Anr. Vs. State Election Commission through the Collector & Ors.; 2012 (5) Bom.C.R. 411

3. The learned AGP submits that already the final notification

under Rule 5 regarding formation of wards has been published even before

filing of the petition and considering the relief being claimed, without there

being any challenge to the final notification, the petitioner cannot be heard.

4. The learned advocate Mr. Kadethankar for the State Election

Commission submits that the elections are being conducted in view of the

directives of the Supreme Court, in an expeditious manner. The petitioner

cannot be allowed to create any obstacles. He would further point out that

this Court in similar set of facts has taken a view that issuing any direction

for reconsidering formation of wards at this juncture without hearing all the

voters would have the effect of causing obstruction in their rights even when

they are comfortable with the formation of wards.

5. At the outset, it is necessary to note that though the petitioner is

coming out with a grievance of formation of wards not in accordance with

the Rules (supra), the prayer being made (supra) in fact was not available to

be made without questioning the legality and validity of the final

notification published in August 2022, even before the petition was filed in

921.WP.10186.22.odt

September 2022. It is therefore apparent that a final notification has

already been issued under Rule 5 and is in place and would be the basis for

impending election. Even the election program has been published. There

are directions of the Supreme Court to hold the elections expeditiously in

the matter of Rahul Ramesh Wagh Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.;

(Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.19756/2021 dated 20.07.2022).

6. The petitioner is seeking this Court to invoke the powers of this

Court under Article 226. A full bench of this Court in the matter of

Karmaveer Tulshiram Autade and Ors. Vs. The State Election Commission

Mumbai and Ors.; 2021 (2) Mh.L.J. 349 has already taken a view that the

relief which would have the effect of stalling or obstructing the elections

which are eminent cannot be entertained under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India.

7. The Writ Petition is dismissed.

  (Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.)                                  (MANGESH S. PATIL, J.)




habeeb