JUDGMENT:- By this petition, the petitioner challenges order rendered by learned Collector, Jalgaon, on application No.9/2007 whereby petition filed by the petitioner under section 3(1 )(a) of the Maharashtra Local Authority Members' Disqualification Act, 1986 and under Rule 6 of the Maharashtra Local Authority Members' Disqualification Rules, 1987 came to be rejected.

2. There took place election for the posts of councilor of Municipal Council, Bhusawalon 19th & 20th November, 2006. The petitioner claims to be the President of a pre poll coalition called "Shahar Bachav Aghadi". He asserted that said "Aghadi" had set up candidates in the municipal elections by issuing necessary "A-B" forms to the concerned candidates. He further asserted that the respondent No.1 submitted the nomination form from ward No.16 as a candidate of the said Aghadi. The respondent No.1 was declared elected from the said ward on 21 -11-2006. The respondent No.1 allegedly filed an affidavit dated 05-03-2007 in Writ Petition No.853/2007 which was filed by one Ashokkumar Agasdas Maidasani. In his affidavit, the respondent No. 1 stated that he was not at all part and parcel of any Aghadi, whatsoever, and had no connection with the "Shahar Bachav Aghadi. Bhusawal". The petitioner submitted a petition before the learned District Collector, Jalgaon, seeking disqualification of the respondent No.1 due to his subsequent misconduct of the betrayal to the Aghadi.

3. The respondent No.1 resisted the petition on various grounds. He contended that the petition was not duly verified as provided under Rule 6(4) of the Maharashtra Local Authority Members' Disqualification Rules . 1987 (for short, "the MLAMD Rules"). He also alleged that the petition was untenable because the necessary affidavit in support of the petition was not filed. The respondent No.1 contended that he had contested the election as an independent candidate and was elected as such from the ward No.16. He further asserted that the documents filed alongwith the petition were not duly and legally verified and, therefore, could not be taken into account. Thus, he denied that he was a candidate setup by the "Shahar Bachav Aghadi". He asserted that the petition was liable to be dismissed on preliminary grounds due to infringement of the Rule 6(4) and Rule-7 or the MLAMD Rules.

4. The petitioner lateron submitted a duly verified petition alongwith a separate affidavit on 14-09-2007. He filed an application to consider the amended petition and the affidavit by substituting the same in place of the original petition.

5. The learned Collector heard the parties to the petition. The learned Collector held that the compliance of Rule 6(4) and Rule 7 of the MLAMD Rules was not made by the petitioner. He held that these are mandatory provisions and the non-compliance of the Rules, in any respect could result in dismissal of the petition. He referred to "Sadashiv H. Patil Vs. Vithal D. Teke and others 2001 (1) Mah.L.J. 312 (S.C.). "Mirza Kadir Beg Rasul Beg Vs. District Collector and others" 2003(4) BCR 672 and Hariharrao Vishwasrao Bhosikar Vs. Datta Anandrao Pawar and others" 2006(1) ALL MR 702. in order to reach conclusion that the strict compliance with the said Rules is necessary. The learned Collector, therefore, held that the petition was defective and as such, was liable to be dismissed. Thus, the disqualification reference petition was disposed of/dismissed vide the impugned order.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

7. Clinching question is whether minor defects in the manner of verification of the reference petition filed under the Maharashtra l.oca1 Authority Members' Disqualification Act. 19S6 (for short. "the MLAMD Act") and non-filing of the affidavit could be regarded the major and incurable procedural defects which could entail dismissal of the election reference petition or the same could be regarded as curable defects. The next question is whether the learned Collector failed to prope

Click Here to Read the rest of this document