← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/4838/2021dismissed

Ramesh S/O Satyanarayan Bajaj Authorised Election Agent Of Shri. Gopikisan S/O Radhakisan Bajoriya v. The Election Commission Of India Nirvachan Sadan, New Delhi

2021-11-29Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sunil B. Shukre,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Anil L. Pansare2 pages

wp4838.2021.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO.4838/2021 Ramesh S/o Satyanarayan Bajaj ..Vs..

The Election Commission of India, New Delhi and others ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court'

s or Judge'

s Order Coram, appearances, Court'

s Orders or directions and Registrar'

s order Mr. Arun Agrawal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Neerja Choubey, Advocate for respondent No.1. Ms K.S. Joshi, In-charge Government Pleader for respondent No.2. Mr. Sunil V. Manohar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ved R. Deshpande, Advocate for respondent No.3.

CORAM :- SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND ANIL L. PANSARE, JJ.

DATED :- 29.11.2021 .

Heard Mr. Arun Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.P. for respondent No.2 and Mr. Sunil Manohar, learned Senior Advocate for respondent No.3.

2.

In a matter being Writ Petition No.4827/2021 decided just before this petition, we have already taken a view that jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in view of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Mohinder Singh Gill & Anr. V/s. The Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhli & Ors., reported in (1978) 1 SCC 405 and in the case of Election Commission of India through Secretary V/s. Ashok Kumar

wp4838.2021.odt & Ors, reported in (2000) 8 SCC 216 and also clarified by this Court in the case of Karmaveer Tulshiram Autade and others V/s. The State Election Commission, Mumbai and others decided on 13th January, 2021 in Writ Petition (Stamp) No.26/2021 together with other connected matters, is not available to a person like the petitioner to challenge the order of acceptance of the nomination form of respondent No.3. The petition is, therefore, not maintainable and is dismissed summarily. No costs. JUDGE JUDGE Tambaskar.