← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/5466/2015rejected at admission stage

Sachin Laxman Markad And Another v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

2015-06-26Hon'Ble Shri Justice R. M. Borde,Hon'Ble Shri Justice P.R. Bora2 pages

wp5466.15.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5466 OF 2015 Sachin s/o Laxman Markad & another .. PETITIONERS

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. S.D. Kotkar, advocate for petitioners.

Mr. S.G. Karlekar, AGP for the State.

Mr. S.T. Shelke, advocate for respondent no. 3. ===== CORAM : R.M. BORDE & P. R. BORA, JJ.

DATE : 26th JUNE, 2015 PER COURT :

1.

Petitioners are praying for issuance of directions to respondents to take decision on the objection tendered by them in respect of provisional list of voters published for holding elections to respondent no. 5 Village Panchayat and make necessary changes in the final list of voters. It appears that petitioners raised objection to the voters' list on 06.04.2015 and, according to petitioners, said objection has not been taken into consideration.

2.

Learned counsel for State Election Commission has pointed out the program published by the Commission in respect of finalisation of voters' list. As per the program, 10th February, 2015, is the cut off date in respect of inclusion of names in the voters' list. Preliminary voters' list was published on 26.02.2015 and the objections were invited by the State

wp5466.15.doc Election Commission upto 05.03.2015. The objection application at Exh. 'C' dated 04.03.2015 does not relate to inclusion or deletion of voter in voters list but essentially relates to delimitation of wards. After consideration of all the objections, the list was finalised and published on 14.03.2015. According to the State Election Commission, in observance of the program, the list has been finalised and the same is published. It does appear that objection tendered by petitioner on 06.04.2015 is after publication of final list of voters which is not liable to be considered. Writ petition is devoid of substance hence stands rejected.

3.

Pending civil application, if any, does not survive and stands disposed of.

( P. R. BORA ) ( R. M. BORDE ) JUDGE JUDGE dyb