The main legal point established is that interference in the election process should be avoided, and the proper remedy for challenging the election is to file an election petition after the election is completed.

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard the petition by consent of learned counsel appearing for both the parties.

2. This petition was assigned to this Court pursuant to the direction dated 30.6.2015 from the Honourable Chief Justice of this Court.

3. The facts of the case, are thus :

The petitioner is contesting the general elections as Member of Kanzara village Panchayat to be held on 4.8.2015 from Ward No.2 of the said village Panchayat. Respondent No.1/Tahsildar, Kanzara village, Taluka Mangrulpir and respondent No.2/Anil Bhaurao Yewtikar are appointed as returning officer to held elections of village Panchayat of Kanzara pursuant to election notice dated 4.7.2015 issued by respondent No.1/Tahsildar, Kanzara, Taluka Mangrulpir, District Washim. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.2 returning officer could not have considered nomination form of respondent No.3 Sunil Namdeorao Harne for contesting the election as Member of the village panchayat; Kanzara on the ground that respondent No.3 was disqualified by order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati. However, the returning officer without any application of mind to the order passed by the said competent Authority wrongly accepted the nomination form filed by respondent No.3.

4. My attention is invited by learned counsel for the petitioner to order dated 4.9.2014 in Appeal No.41/BVP 16(2)Kanzara/2013-14 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati in an appeal under Section 16(2) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1958 (for short, “the said Act”). The Additional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati was hearing the appeal against order passed by the Additional Collector, Washim on 17.10.2013 whereby the Additional Collector, Washim had rejected the application preferred by petitioner Amol Subhashrao Solanke. The application was moved before the Additional Collector, Washim by the petitioner to reject the nomination form filed by Sunil Namdeorao Harne on the ground that said Sunil Namdeorao Harne had encroached upon the government land as he made construction unlawfully to the extent of 368 square feet on the plot No.10 is area admeasuring 325 square feet only. The additional construction to the extent of 43 square feet was made encroaching upon the government land. The Talathi of village Kanzara had reported the encroachment on the government land to the superior Authority. In the result, the Additional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati was pleased to allow the appeal made by the petitioner on the ground that respondent No.3 Sunil Harne incurred disqualification as member of the village Panchayat, Kanzaraunder Section 14(j-3) of the said Act.

It is under these circumstances, it is contended on behalf of the petitioner that when the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati remained unchallenged, the returning officer was bound to consider the same to take an appropriate decision on the question of disqualification incurred by Shri Sunil Harne for to contest the village Panchayat election as Member thereof. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, last election for village Panchayat Kanzara was held on 8.8.2010 and the first meeting of elected members of village Panchayat was conducted on 17.9.2010. Therefore, in view of Section 28 of the said Act, the term of village Panchayat Kanzara is deemed to have commenced from 17.9.2015 which was the first meeting of the members of the village Panchayat Kanzara. Thus, the tenure of the elected members of the village Panchayat would last for five years w.e.f. 17.9.2010 until 16.9.2015 while respondent No.3 is elected sitting member of village Panchayat Kanzara, he incurred disqualification as member of village Panchayat because of encroachment made by him upon the government land as stated above.

5. My attention is invited to Section 14(1)(j-3) of the said Act regarding disqualifications, wh