In election disputes, the Returning Officer must allow candidates to rectify nomination defects; appellate courts must not interfere post symbol allotment without subserving electoral integrity.

JUDGMENT:

ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.

1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. Due to urgency, heard finally.

2. Heard Mr. V. D. Sapkal, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Y. V. Kakade, Advocate instructed by Mr. Z. H. Farooqui, Advocate for Petitioners, Mr. R. B. Ade, Advocate for Respondent No.7 in WP/14354/2025, Mr. D. R. Korade, AGP for Respondent/State in WP/14354/2025, Mr. R. B. Ade, Advocate for Respondent No.10 in WP/14355/2025, Mr. S. K. Tambe, AGP for Respondent / State in WP/14355/2025, Mr. Sachindra Shetye along with Ms. Sharayu Dhanture & Mr. Akshay Pansare, Advocate for the State Election Commission.

3. By the present petitions the petitioners challenge the impugned orders dated 28.11.2025, passed by the appellate court under Rule 15 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils and Nagar Panchayats Election Rules, 1966 (for brevity “the Election Rules”), whereby the nominations of the petitioners i.e. Sidharth Gopal Pardeshi (WP/14355/2025) and Priyanka Yogesh Gavhane (WP/14354/2025) are rejected by setting aside the orders of the Returning Officer accepting the nomination of the petitioners filed for the election of Ward No.6 (Seat 6-A & 6-B) of Paithan Municipal Council. The order dated 28.11.2025 passed by the appellate court in Election Petition No.6/2025 was rectified on 29.11.2025 by observing that in the title cause of the Judgment, names of respondents No.3 to 8 are mistakenly copied from other election appeal. As it is a typing mistake, name of respondents no.3 to 8 are deleted and respondents no.3 to 5 are corrected and, accordingly, respondent no.3’s name Priyanka Yogesh Gavhane was mentioned in the cause title and her nomination was set aside at the instance of the objector / appellant Alkabai.

4. Although, this court would be very slow in entertaining writ petition against the orders of the Returning Officer or the appellate authority in exercise of writ jurisdiction, however, on account of intervening event of postponement of election and peculiar facts and circumstances of this case it has become necessary for this court to examine the issues raised and deal with the same.

5. The elections are already postponed by the Notification dated 29.11.2025, wherein it is mentioned that wherever the appellate court has passed orders under Rule 15 of the Election Rules after 22.11.2025 i.e. on 23.11.2025 or thereafter the nominated candidates did not have the opportunity to withdraw their nomination and in all these cases the elections are stayed and a fresh election programme would be issued on 04.12.2025, wherein last date of withdrawal of candidature would be 10.12.2025 up till 03:00 p.m. and the allotment of symbols would be on 11.12.2025 and the date of polling would be on 20.12.2025.

6. Both these petitions are taken up together as they arise from identical facts and from the same ward of the Paithan Municipal Council. The facts are taken from Writ Petition No.14355 of 2025.

FACTS OF THE CASE:-

7. On the direction of the State Election Commission, the State Government published a Gazette Notification dated 30.09.2025 in exercise of powers under Sections 9, 10 and 341B of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 (for brevity “the Act”), wherein, the State demarcated the number of wards of the Paithan municipal area as given in the schedule for the Paithan Municipal Council (The schedule provides that the total number of councillors to be elected for Paithan Municipal Council are 25, 2 councillors each for 11 wards, 3 councillo