Rule, made returnable forthwith and with the consent of parties, heard.

2. This petition impugns the order dated 12-3-2007 passed by the Und Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jargon in Reference No.1 of 2007. By the said order, the Reference No. 1 of 2007 made by the respondent No.8, Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Jalgaon has been allowed and consequently, a declaration has been issued that the respondent No. 1 herein stands disqualified as a Municipal Corporate of the Jalgaon Municipal Corporation on account of he having a third child after the cut of date.

3. The factual matrix involved in the petition is stated thus. The election of the petitioner was held sometime in September, 2003 and the results were declared on 14-9-2003. The petitioner herein and the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 have been declared as elected Corporations of the said Municipal Corporation. The respondents Nos. 1 to 4 herein on 10-10-2005 filed an application under sections 10, 11 and 12 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'. In the said application, the respondents Nos. 1 to 4 herein stated that the petitioner's wife namely; Anita has delivered third child on 8-12-2003 and in terms of the amendment effected to section 10 of the said Act, the present petitioner has incurred a disqualification and, therefore, cannot continue as a Corporate. The respondent Nos. 1 to 4 had annexed documents in support of the said application. On receipt of the said application, the Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation issued a notice to the petitioner calling upon him to show cause. The Commissioner called upon the petitioner to explain as to whether Nana Baliram Son wane and Naresh Baliram Son wane is one and the same person. The Commissioner upon receipt of the reply of the petitioner referred the matter to the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division for adjudication of the said issued by his order dated 15-10-2005. This was in terms of the mandate of the said Act.

4. On receipt of the Reference by the Civil Court, the said Reference was numbered as Reference No. 1/2007. The Reference Court had issued notices to the respondents in said Reference which included the petitioner. The petitioner and his wife thereafter appeared in said Reference and submitted their say/written statement on 14-11-2005. The Reference was proceeded with by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon. The applications in the said Reference i.e. the respondents Nos. I to 4 herein led evidence of 5 witnesses in support of their case. The petitioner examined himself in support of his denial. The respondents Nos. I to 4 herein also produced a host of documents in support of their case. The said documents were principally the record of the hospital where the wife of the petitioner had given birth to the third child as also the record relating to the school wherein the third child has been enrolled as also some other supporting documentary evidence. The trial Court, on the basis of the material before it, came to a conclusion that the child born on 8-12-2003 in Maher Hospital, Jalgaon was the third child of the petitioner and, therefore, the petitioner stood disqualified on the application of section 10 of the said Act. The said judgment, of the trial Court dated 12-3-2007 as indicated above is the subject matter of the above petition.

5. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner Shri B.R. Varma, learned Counsel for respondents Nos. I to 4 Shri K.C. Sant, learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader Shri V.H. Dighe for respondents No.5 to 7 and Shri P. R. Patil, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 8.

On behalf of the petitioner, the principal submission of the learned Counsel Shri Warma was that since the consequences of the application of the respondents Nos. 1 to 4, would have the result of disqualification of the petitioner, the charge of having third child was therefore to be proved beyond doubt by the said respondents. It