Shri. Sanjay Vishwambar Patil v. The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad And ORS.

pdp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 14099 OF 2016 Shri Sanjay Vishwambar Patil .. Petitioner Vs.

The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Barshi and ors.

.. Respondents Mr. B. D. Joshi for petitioner.

Mr. A. S. Kulkarni for respondent no.1.

Mr. N. P. Deshpande, Addl. GP for respondent nos.2 to 4 and 6. Mr. S. B. Shetye for respondent no.5.

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

JANUARY 12, 2017.

P.C.

1.

Learned counsel appearing for the Election Commission submits that notification for holding election to Zilla Parishad in the State is declared. Learned counsel tendered communication dated 11/1/2017, which is taken on record.

2.

Petition raises issue concerning the ward formation. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that it is noticed that the Commission Authorities have not followed the prescribed procedure in ward formation. The Commission would take into consideration the alleged violations by the authorities. In view of the subsequent

development of declaration of election in the State, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter.

3.

The petitioner's grievance is that after the draft ward formation was prepared by the Tahsildar, it was sent to the Collector's office and at that level Collector, on his own, amended the draft formation and thereafter forwarded it to the Divisional Commissioner. The said changes brought in by the Collector were not made known to the public at large by following appropriate procedure.

4.

Learned counsel appearing for Election Commission submits that whosoever raised objection before the Divisional Commissioner was heard and thereafter final ward formation was declared. Learned counsel for Election Commission denies the allegations made and submits that the internal correspondence made between the officers concerned cannot be a matter of challenge in writ petition.

4.

The petitioner may file a comprehensive representation to the Election Commission.

5.

In the facts, no interference is warranted. The Petition is dismissed.

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