Ashok Bhanudas Mule v. The Divisional Commissioner Aurangabad And Others

2024:BHC-AUG:1294 12-WP-237-24.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 237 OF 2024 Ashok s/o. Bhanudas Mule, Age 43 years, Occu. Agri., R/o. Maliwada, Taluka and District Aurangabad ..

Petitioner

Versus

1.

The Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad Division Aurangabad 2.

The Collector, Aurangabad 3.

The Tahsildar, Aurangabad 4.

The Block Development OfÏcer, Aurangabad 5.

Kadu s/o. Janardhan Kirtikar Age 40 years, Occu.Agri., R/o. Maliwada, Taluka and District Aurangabad ..

Respondents Mr. Vijay B. Kale, Advocate for the Petitioner; Mr. A. S. Shinde, A.G.P. for Respondents No.1 to 3 CORAM : S. G. MEHARE, J.

DATE : 11-01-2024 PER COURT :- 1.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2.

Issue notice to the respondents. Learned A.G.P. waives service of notice for respondents No.1 to 3.

12-WP-237-24.odt 3.

The petitioner has complained against respondent No.5 who is a village panchayat member that at the time of submitting nomination he has submitted the false documents. He produced false no dues certificate of taxes of property Nos. 502/1, 491, 450. Property Nos. 491 and 450 were the village panchayat's property. It is standing in the name of his mother. Property No.502/1 is also village panchayat's property. He resides in the property No.491. On the complaint, the inquiry was conducted and the reports were called. It was the report that respondent No.5 is not residing in property Nos. 491 and 450. He is a tenant in the property No.341. Considering the factual matrix, the Collector dismissed the complaint. The petitioner preferred appeal before respondent No.1/the Additional Commissioner - 2, Aurangabad.

He appreciated the facts and dismissed the appeal. 4.

The petition was based upon the factual aspects. Both authorities have appreciated the facts and appears to have committed no error in the impugned order. Considering the writ jurisidiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and no apparent errors in the impugned orders, the Court is not satisfied that there are grounds to interfere with the impugned orders. Hence, the writ petition stands dismissed at admission stage. ( S. G. MEHARE, J. ) rrd