JUDGMENT:- Petitioners, in these petitions, are challenging the order passed by Collector, Dhule dated 27th May, 2009, thereby turning down objections raised in the References presented by Respondent No.1 to the Collector under Section 7 of Maharashtra Local Authority Members' Disqualification Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as "Disqualification Act").

2. Petitions presented by Respondent No.1 herein under Section 7 of the Disqualification Act were referred to the Collector regarding disqualification of petitioners. Petitioners are elected members of Zilla Parishad, Dhule. It is the allegation of respondent No.1 that petitioners in disregard to the whip issued by leader of Zilla Parishad party have cast vote at the elections of President and Vice President as against the candidate set up by the party and as such they have incurred disqualification within meaning of Disqualification Act and as such are liable to be unseated. There was preliminary objections raised as regards maintainability of References by the petitioners. The objections raised are set out as below:

(a) The References do not comply with the requirement of Rule 6 of Disqualification Rules;

(b) The References have not been verified in the manner prescribed by Order 6, Rule 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure;

(c) The annexures annexed to the References are not signed by the applicant and are not verified in the manner laid down in the Code of Civil Procedure for verification of pleadings;

(d) The applicant does not sign statement of material facts on which applicant rely;

(e) The applicant has not filed affidavits in support of the References as required by Order 6, Rule 15(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure;

(f) Applicant has not given names of persons from whom applicant gained information;

(g) Applicant is not authorised or recognised as leader of Zilla Parishad party and he has not been elected as a leader of Zilla Parishad party, therefore, he is not empowered to issue whip and as such has no locus standi to file Reference.

(h) National Congress Party (NCP) is not registered as required by provisions of the Act as a Zilla Parishad Party.

3. According to petitioners herein, mandatory requirements in respect of presentation of References have not been complied with and as such. References are liable to be rejected in view of provisions of Rule 7(2) of the Maharashtra Local Authority Members' Disqualification Rules, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as "Rules of 1987").

4. The objections raised by petitioners herein were controverted by the respondents contending that there is sufficient compliance of the procedure as prescribed by Rules. It is also submitted that provisions of Rule 7 are directory in nature and non compliance thereof will not lead to a consequence of automatic dismissal of References.

5. After considering rival contentions, Collector, Dhule, while passing Impugned order has held that most of the objections raised by petitioners are without any substance. However, so far as verification of references and defect as regards putting signatures on annexures by respondents is concerned, it is observed by the Collector that said defect is curable and is not fatal in view of certain judgments referred to in the order. The Collector, Dhule, as such, turned down the objections raised by petitioners herein in view of the order passed on 27.05.2009. The petitioners, as such, have approached this Court raising challenge to the order passed by Collector, Dhule, holding that References presented to the Collector are maintainable.

6. I have heard arguments advanced by Shri. V. J. Dixit, learned Senior Counsel holding for Shri. P. D. Bachate. advocate for petitioners and Shri. P. M. Shah, learned Senior Counsel holding for Shri. S. P. Shah, advocate for Respondent No.1.

7. Although learned Senior Counsel appearing for Respondent No.1 has controverted the contentions raised by petitioners in respect of compliance of provisions of Rule 7 of the Rules and has contended that there

Click Here to Read the rest of this document