Lalit Krishna Patil And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

1 903-wp-7097-2020.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7097 OF 2020 Lalit Krishna Patil and others ... Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and others ... Respondents ....

Mr. G. V. Wani, Advocate for petitioners Mr. A. R. Kale, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 and 3 Mr. Ajit Kadethankar, Advocate for respondent No.2 ....

CORAM :S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.

DATED : 15th DECEMBER, 2020 PER COURT :- 1.

Mr. Wani, learned counsel submits that on 02.01.2020, the petitioners had submitted objection to the ward formation. The respondent did not conduct hearing, nor the petitioners were intimated any date of hearing and the wards have been finalised without considering the objection of the petitioners. The petitioners were visiting the village every time, but did not get any response. 2.

Mr. Kadethankar, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and the learned AGP, submit that the objections were heard on 29.02.2020 and thereafter the decision was also taken, but because

2 903-wp-7097-2020.doc of COVID-19, ward formation was not finalised. The wards have been finalised on 27.10.2020 and now, the election programme is also declared.

3.

The draft ward formation in Form-B was published for the first time on 07.02.2020. The final date to submit objection to the draft ward formation was 14.02.2020.

4.

It appears, the petitioners raised objection to the ward formation on 02.01.2020 i.e. even prior to publication of the draft ward formation in Form-B. Moreover, the wards have already been finalized long back. The election programme has already been declared. The petitioners did not raise objection to the draft ward formation in Form-B, as per the schedule.

5.

In light of that, no case for interference is made out. The writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

[ SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI ] [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA ] JUDGE JUDGE SMS