SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1998 Supreme(Bom) 824

N.J.PANDYA, A.B.PALKAR
Maroti Sakharam Wasekar – Appellant
Versus
Tahsildar, Mul & another – Respondent


ORDER :---We are passing common order in both the petitions as common question is involved.

2. The elections to Gram Panchayat Sintala, Taluqa Mul, District Chandrapur, were to be held as per the election programme announced some-where in the early part of December 1998. The nominations were to be filed on 7-12-1998 followed by its scrutiny and thereafter holding of the election. The elections are to be held on 26-12-1998. Following the scrutiny in both the matters the nomination papers of respective petitioner were rejected on 12-12-1998.

3. So far as the reason for rejection is concerned, the Returning Officer held that the municipal dues relating to water bill charges have not been paid.

4. In both the petitions, it is a common ground of the respective petitioners that the aforesaid finding is baseless because the alleged bills were not served on the petitioners and if served no notice of demand was made. When the matter was circulated before us on 17-12-1998, we issued Notice with a view to enable the respondents to find out whether the petitioners in fact were defaulters in payment of municipal dues and so far as important aspect of notice is concerned, is there no acknowledgment




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top