Ashok Vasantrao Kulkarni And Others v. The Election Commission Of Maharashtra And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 928 WRIT PETITION NO.8146 OF 2020 ASHOK VASANTRAO KULKARNI AND OTHERS

VERSUS

THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS AND 931 WRIT PETITION NO.8149 OF 2020 NARAYAN BHANUDAS MANE AND OTHERS

VERSUS

THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS AND 932 WRIT PETITION NO.8150 OF 2020 SHARAD VASANTRAO KULKARNI AND TOHERS

VERSUS

THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Petitioners : Mr More Abhijit S. AGP for Respondents: Mr. S. P. Tiwari, Mr. K. N.Lokhande Advocate for Respondent No.1 : Mr. A. B.Katneshwarkar

CORAM

: S. V. GANGAPURWALA & SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.

DATE : 10th December, 2020 ORDER:

1.

Mr. More, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Ward formation has been done erroneously by the authority. The petitioners raised objection that the ward formation is not done in consonance with Rule 3 of the Bombay Village Panchayat (Numbers, Divisions Into wards and Reservation of Seats) Rules, 1966. The learned counsel submits that since many years, the petitioners are voters from Ward No.2. Now, this area is included in Wad No.3. The same is illegal. The learned counsel tried to demonstrate the uneven distribution of wards. 2.

We have also heard learned A.G.Ps. for the State and Mr. Katneshwarkar, learned counsel for respondent No.1.

3.

It would appear that the objections raised by the petitioner, except suggesting that their houses are placed in Ward No.3 illegally, no grounds are raised about the manner of illegality. 4.

It would be inappropriate in writ jurisdiction to consider any other ground not raised in the objection.

5.

In light of that, writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. (SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.) JPC