← Library
Bombay High CourtLPA/59/2012disposed off

Mahendra Vasantrao Uikey And Another v. Rajesh Shrawan Ghodpage And Another

2021-09-06Hon'Ble Shri Justice A.S. Chandurkar,Hon'Ble Smt. Justice Pushpa V. Ganediwala2 pages

217 lpa59.12.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 59 OF 2012 IN WRIT PETITION NO.547 OF 2012 (D) Mahendra Vasantrao Uikey Vs. Rajesh Shrawan Ghodpage and another _______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court'

s orders of directions Court'

s or Judge'

s orders.

and Registrar'

s Orders.

Shri Anuj Gandhi, Advocate h/f Shri S.P. Bhandarkar, Advocate for appellant. CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR AND PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, JJ.

DATED : SEPTEMBER 07, 2021.

Heard.

2.

The appellant, in order to contest the elections declared by the Nagpur Municipal Corporation, Nagpur from Ward No.39(A), Zone (6) had filed an objection to the candidature extended to respondent no.1 on the basis that respondent no.1 was not having a caste validity certificate and, therefore, prayed for rejection of his nomination form. It is stated that the Election Officer accordingly had rejected his nomination form. Respondent no.1 came before this Court in Writ Petition No.547 of 2012. The appellant herein intervened in the aforesaid writ petition. The Single Bench of this Court after hearing both the sides, allowed the writ petition and directed to accept the nomination of respondent no.1.

3.

Feeling aggrieved by the decision of the learned Single Judge dated 06.02.2012, the appellant approached this Court in this Letters Patent Appeal.

217 lpa59.12.odt 4.

Shri Anuj Gandhi, learned counsel holding for Shri S.P. Bhandarkar, learned counsel for appellant submits that the term of the election of five years is over due to passage of time as the schedule of the election was in January, 2012. 5.

In this view of the matter, nothing survives in this appeal for adjudication. Hence, the Letters Patent Appeal No.59 of 2012 stands disposed of as being rendered infructuous. No costs. JUDGE JUDGE Wagh