Sana Adnan Sayyed v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

1 Sr912 WP2200.2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY.

BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

WRIT PETITION NO. 2200 OF 2018 Sana w/o Adnan Sayyed ... Petitioner

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

... Respondents ..........

Mr Vijay A. Dhakne, Advocate for the petitioner Mrs A. V. Gondhalekar, AGP for respondent/State .............

CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA & A. M. DHAVALE, JJ.

DATE : 24TH FEBRUARY, 2018.

ORDER:

1.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner has filed a complaint before the Committee with regard to the documents obtained by the respondent No. 4. The petitioner is a defeated candidate in the election. According to the learned counsel, the Committee is not deciding the proceeding and has not taken cognizance of the complaint.

2.

We cannot preempt the proceeding before the Committee. The Committee has not taken any decision in the validation proceedings. At present, the petitioner does not have any cause of

2 Sr912 WP2200.2018 action to say that the Committee is not considering his complaint. If the validity is issued without considering the complaint of the petitioner, then the petitioner may have cause. 3.

As the proceedings are still pending before the Committee, the same is not yet decided, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition.

4.

Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No costs. [ A. M. DHAVALE ] [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA ] JUDGE JUDGE Punde