JUDGMENT - THAKKER C.K., C.J.:---A common question of law has been raised in all the petitions. To appreciate the controversy raised in the present group of petitions, few relevant facts in the first petition may be noted.

2. The petitioner of the first petition (Writ Petition No. 4060 of 2002) has approached this Court by invoking Article 226 of the Constitution for an appropriate writ, direction or order, quashing and setting aside an order dated November 8, 2002 (Annexure 6) by which respondent No. 1, Returning Officer, Balegaon, Taluka Akot, rejected the nomination form of the petitioner.

3. The case of the petitioner is that he is a bona fide resident of village Balegaon, Taluka Akot, District Akola since his birth. Village Balegaon has an independent Gram Panchayat consisting of three wards. The petitioner has two brothers, Devidas and Vilas. All the three brothers, however, reside separately in their respective houses. The petitioner's elder brother Devidas owns and resides in a house bearing No. 24, his brother Vilas owns and stays in a house bearing No. 25, whereas the petitioner stays in a house bearing No. 26. All the brothers are paying house taxes to the Gram Panchayat independently in their own names separately registered in the record of the Gram Panchayat. Necessary documents showing possession of the petitioner of House No. 26 is placed on record along with the petition.

4. The petitioner has stated that election of Gram Panchayat, Balegaon, was declared by the first respondent vide an election notification dated September 26, 2002. As per the election programme, the nomination forms were to be submitted between 24th October, 2002 and 7th November, 2002. The date of scrutiny was fixed as November 8, 2002 and November 11, 2002 was fixed for publication of list of final candidates. A copy of the election programme is also annexed to the petition at Annexure 3. The petitioner being resident in ward No. 2 of village Balegaon, was eligible to contest the election. He submitted his nomination form as one of the candidates from the said ward on November 7, 2002 (Annexure 4).

5. Ramdas s/o Kisan Ghormade, respondent No. 2 herein, who had also submitted his nomination form from Ward No. 2 as a contesting candidate against the petitioner raised an objection by filing an application on November 8, 2002 (Annexure 5) inter alia, contending that the petitioner was living in joint family in House No. 32 and he failed to pay tax due to the panchayat. His nomination, therefore, was required to be rejected. On the said objection raised by respondent No. 2, the Secretary of the Gram Panchayat was called. According to the petitioner, the Secretary categorically stated that there were no dues against the petitioner, original record of the Gram Panchayat was also shown which disclosed that there were no dues against the petitioner. Despite, respondent No. 1, Returning Officer, rejected the nomination form of the petitioner by the impugned order dated November 8, 2002, which is challenged in the petition.

6. The petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the order dated November 8, 2002 and to direct the first respondent to accept the nomination form submitted by the petitioner and to allow him to contest the election. Interim relief is also prayed against implementation of the order dated November 8, 2002.

7. The petition was filed on November 12, 2002. No caveat was filed by any of the respondents. On November 12, 2002, the vacation Judge issued notice before admission by making it returnable on November 20, 2002. The learned Assistant Government Pleader appeared and waived service for respondent No. 1 while Hamdast was allowed for respondent No. 2. On 21st November, 2002, the matter was placed before us and we had heard the arguments.

8. Similar question is raised in the remaining petitions and on one ground or the other, nomination forms submitted by the petitioners came to be rejected by the Returning Officer. Hence, all the matters

Click Here to Read the rest of this document