Pradip Khanderao Deshmukh v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

1 wp 9251.13

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9251 OF 2013 Pradip Khanderao Deshmukh .. Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and another .. Respondents Shri Vijay B. Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri S. B. Pulkundwar, A.G.P. for the Respondent No. 1. Shri Uday S. Malte, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2. Shri S. B. Yawalkar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 6. Shri P. V. Barde, Advocate for the Respondent No. 7. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND K. K. SONAWANE, JJ.

DATE : 28TH JUNE, 2016.

PER COURT :

.

Mr. Barde and Mr. Yawalkar, the learned counsel for respondents raise a preliminary objection that the petitioner has an alternate remedy by way of an election petition, in view of the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 11278 of 2012 decided vide judgment dated 11.03.2016. 2.

In the light of the above, though Mr. Patil, the learned counsel sought to canvass submissions on merits of the matter, we are not inclined to consider the same.

2 wp 9251.13 3.

The petitioner may file an Election Petition. The authority may consider the time spent in prosecuting the present writ petition in case of applicability of Sec. 14 of the Limitation Act. The authority may consider to dispose of the election petition, that may be filed by the petitioner expeditiously after hearing all parties concerned, in accordance with law. All contentions of respective parties are kept open. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

[ K. K. SONAWANE, J. ] [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] bsb/June 16