SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Bom) 1430

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Vibha Kankanwadi, Hiten S. Venegavkar, JJ.
Sadik Abdulkadir Shiledar - Petitioners
Versus
The State Election Commission, Through its secretary - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 14436 of 2025
Decided On : 02-12-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. S. D. Kotkar h/f Mr. T. S. Kotkar, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Sachindra Shetye, Advocate

The court upheld the integrity of the election process and denied the petitioner's request to alter established procedures regarding nomination withdrawal, emphasizing adherence to legal protocols.

Headnote:(A) Maharashtra Municipal Councils Rules, 1966 - Revised election program and nomination withdrawal - Petitioner sought direction for revised election from scrutiny stage instead of withdrawal stage post-notification of irregularities; request denied as it contradicted previous court orders and lacked legal basis. (Paras 2, 8, 10)

(B) Election Process - Court's role in maintaining election integrity - Court declined to interfere in ongoing election process despite petitioner's claims, stressing the importance of adhering to established procedures and timelines as per revised notifications. (Paras 8, 9)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners challenged the election process, arguing that guidelines issued after filing nomination forms led to confusion; petitioner No. 2 had previously withdrawn nomination but sought to ignore this decision based on subsequent notifications of electoral irregularities.

Findings of Court:
The election authorities' revised program appropriately addressed issues arising from candidate nomination irregularities.

Issues: Main issues included whether the election process should commence from scrutiny or withdrawal of nominations and the legitimacy of ignoring prior withdrawals.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reaffirmed that once a nomination form is withdrawn, there is no legal provision allowing the candidate to contest again without a valid basis; the election process must uphold integrity as per prior rulings.

Result: Writ petition dismissed with no orders as to costs.

Table of Content
1. procedural timeline for elections. (Para 1 , 2)
2. changes in election guidelines and notifications. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. potential voter confusion from overlapping election dates. (Para 6)
4. petitioner's opposition to election scheduling changes. (Para 7)
5. court’s refusal to intervene in election process. (Para 8 , 9)
6. withdrawal of nomination and its implications. (Para 10)
7. dismissal of the writ petition. (Para 11)

JUDGMENT :

Hiten S. Venegavkar, J.

1. By present petition petitioner seeks direction to the respondent authorities to commence the revised election program from the stage of scrutiny of election forms since various guidelines have been issued after the date of filing of the nomination form by the respondent No. 1 in respect of filing of the nomination forms. The petitioner further prays that petitioner No. 2 be allowed to participate in the revised election program by ignoring his earlier withdrawal of his nomination form.

2. The petitioner submits that respondent No. 1 had issued a notification dated 04.11.2025 and declared the elections of 246 Nagar Parishads and 42 Nagar Panchayats within the State of Maharashtra. The election program for the post of Members and the President of Nagar Parishads and Nagar Panchayats commenced from 06.11.2025 declaring the Collector of the respective districts to declare the election program. As per the election program dated 06.11.2025, the nomination form was to be filled from 10.11.2025 to 17.11.2025. The scrutiny of the nomination form was scheduled on 18.11.2025 and the date for withdrawal of the nomination form would be from 19.11.2025 till 21.11.2025. The election program also contemplated the statutory appeals which are likely to be filed against the rejection of the nomination forms and in such cases, the withdrawal of the nomination form was to be decided to be from 21.11.2025 to 25.11.2025. The date of allotment of symbol and to publish the list of the contesting candidates was scheduled on 26.11.2025. The date of poling was scheduled on 02.12.2025 and the date of counting and declaration of the result of scheduled on 03.12.2025.

3. Petitioner No. 2 has filed his nomination form for the post of ‘President’ and his form came to be declared as valid however, during the scheduled date for withdrawal, petitioner No. 2 has withdrawn his nomination from elections. The petitioner submits that while filing the nomination form, there were certain difficulties to the Returning Officer in respect of the candidate of the political party who have filed the nomination form from 10.11.2025 till 17.11.2025. The scrutiny of the nomination form was scheduled on 18.11.2025 and the date for withdrawal of the nomination form would be from 19.11.2025 till 21.11.2025. The election program also contemplated the statutory appeals which are likely to be filed against the rejection of the nomination forms and in such cases, the withdrawal of the nomination form was decided to be from 21.11.2025 to 25.11.2025. The date of allotment of symbol and to publish the list of the contesting candidates was scheduled on 26.11.2025. The date of poling was scheduled on 02.12.2025 and the date of counting and declaration of the result was scheduled on 03.12.2025.

4. Petitioner No. 2 has filed his nomination form for the post of President and his form came to be declare as valid however during the scheduled date for withdrawal, petitioner No. 2 has withdrawn his nomination from the elections. The petitioner submits that while filing the nomination form there were certain difficulties to the Returning Officer in respect of the candidate of the political parties who have filed the nomination form on behalf of the political party therefore the respondent No. 1 on 17.11.2025, issued the guidelines in respect of the main candidate and the secondary candidate of the political party. It is directed that if the candidate of a political party has filled the form of the signature of one proposer and has su

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top