Dattatraya Baburao Sane v. Netaji Dadarao Kashid And ORS.

Urmila Ingale

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2140 OF 2017 Dattatraya Baburao Sane .. Petitioner Vs.

Netaji Dadarao Kashid and ors.

.. Respondents Mr. S.S.Patwardhan, for the Petitioner.

Mr.D.R.More, for Respondents No.2 & 3.

Mr.S.B.Shetye, for Respondent No.27 - Maharashtra State Election Commission.

CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL & M.S.KARNIK, JJ.

17th FEBRUARY, 2017 P.C. :

.

Leave to add Maharashtra State Election Commission is granted. Amendment to be carried out forthwith. 2.

The petitioner challenges the acceptance of the nomination papers of the respondent No.1. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner raised two grounds for rejecting the nomination papers. a) The respondent No.1 failed to declare that he had to pay more than Rs.30 lakhs as 1/3

entertainment tax. b) He has been residing in the house which was constructed illegally. In respect of the same, communication 21/01/2017 made by the Executive Engineer addressed to the petitioner was submitted and placed before the Returning Officer. By order dated 04/02/2017, the Returning Officer rejected the objection.

3.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of Section 10(1) and 10(1)(d) of Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 (for short 'Act') the Returning Officer ought to have accepted the objection and rejected the nomination papers.

4.

We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents No. 27- State Election Commission. The election process is set in motion. The petitioner has statutory alternate remedy under Section 16 of the Act.

5.

In facts, at this stage, we are not inclined to exercise 2/3

our writ jurisdiction. However, the petitioner is at liberty to resort to appropriate statutory remedy after the election results are declared.

6.

The Petition is accordingly rejected.

(M.S.KARNIK, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL, J.) 3/3