Radhabai Vaijanath Jathale v. Deepali Santosh More And Others

- 1 - wp815.22.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 815 OF 2022 Radhabai Vaianath Jathale Petitioner

Versus

Deepali w/o Santosh More & others Respondents Mr. A. M. Gaikwad, Advocate for the petitioner. CORAM : M.G. Sewlikar, J.

DATE : 28th JULY, 2022.

PER COURT :

1.

Heard.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the election of respondent No. 1 was challenged by fling election petition on four grounds. Those are :- i) Respondent No. 1 did not obtain prior permission from the school authorities before contesting the election. ii) Dues and taxes of the Municipal corporation were in arrears of the father-in-law of respondent No. 1.

iii) The caste certifcate of father-in-law of respondent No. 1 was cancelled and respondent No. 1 contested the election from the ward which was reserved for Scheduled Tribe.

- 2 - wp815.22.odt iv) Respondent No. 1 was involved in corrupt practices in election. 3.

The learned District Judge has given cogent reasons for rejecting these grounds. Respondent No. 1 obtained prior permission of the school management before contesting the election. She was not in arrears of dues and taxes of Municipal Corporation. The caste certifcate of her father was cancelled and not of her father-in-law. She belongs to Scheduled Tribe. The learned District Judge has also observed that the petitioner did not give details about the alleged corrupt practices in elections. The learned District Judge has discussed all these grounds in detail and rejected the same by giving proper reasons.

4.

I do not fnd any infrmity in the appreciation made by the learned District Judge. In the light of this, the petition is devoid of any substance and hence stand dismissed. No costs. ( M. G. SEWLIKAR ) Judge dyb