Advocates:
['SALUNKE MAYUR V', 'COPY SERVED ON GP', '', 'DESHMUKH MAHESH S', 'AGP']

{1}

wp3796-22

drp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

WRIT PETITION NO.3796 OF 2022

Nitin Ashok Patil and Others

PETITIONERS

VERSUS

The Additional Commissioner and Others

RESPONDENTS

.......

Mr. Mayur V. Salunke Advocate for the petitioners

Mr. S. N. Kendre, AGP for respondent - State

Mr. M. S. Deshmukh,Advocate for respondents No.3 to 5

....…

[CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.]

DATE : 20

^th APRIL, 2022

ORDER :

1.

The petitioners are elected as members of village

Panchayat Karmad (Khurd), Taluka – Parola, District – Jalgaon in

the election held on 15^th January, 2021. Respondents No.3 to 5

sought disqualification of the petitioners by filing proceedings

under section sections 14-B (2) and 16 of the Maharashtra

Village Panchayat Act, 1958 (hereinafter for short “the said Act”)

contending that the petitioners have failed to submit the account

of election expenses within a period of thirty days from the date

of declaration of the election result i.e. 18^th January, 2021. The

{2}

wp3796-22

petitioners opposed said proceedings, by filing say that the

petitioners have filed election expenses on 18^th February, 2022,

which is within time and, therefore, they may not be disqualified.

The Collector – respondent No.2, vide order dated 4^th February,

2022 disqualified the petitioners.

2.

The petitioners, therefore, challenged the order of their

disqualification, by filing appeal under section 14B (2) of the said

Act, before the Additional Commissioner – respondent No.1. The

petitioners have contended that the election results were

declared on 18^th January, 2021 and thereafter, when the

petitioners went to submit the account of the election expenses,

on 16^th February, 2016, the returning officer was not available.

Then on 17^th February, 2021, when the petitioners again

approached the office of the returning officer, they were

informed that the returning officer has expired, due to heart

attack. The officers present in the office of the returning officer

refused to accept the accounts of election expenses. Therefore,

the petitioners, on 18^th February, 2021, submitted the account of

the election expenses to the Tahsildar, Parola. Along with the

appeal, the petitioners filed application seeking stay to the order

of disqualification. The stay application filed by the petitioners is

rejected by the Commissioner – respondent No.1. Hence, the

{3}

wp3796-22

present writ petition.

3.

This matter was heard for admission on 23^rd March, 2022

and interim order is passed in favour of the petitioners. Now,

respondents No.3 to 5 have appeared in the matter and opposed

the writ petition.

4.

Heard learned advocate for the petitioners. Learned

advocate for the respondents and the learned Assistant

Government Pleader.

5.

Learned advocate for the petitioners submits that election

results were declared on 18^th January, 2021 and the petitioners

submitted election expenses on 18^th January, 2021, however, the

Collector has erroneously held that the election expenses should

have been submitted on or before 16^th February, 2021. By

relying in “Shaikh Nisar Ibrahim and Another V/s State of

Maharashtra and Others” 2019 (5) Mh.L.J. 749, he submits that

minor delay of 2 days in this case ought to have been condoned

and the Collector was not justified in disqualifying the

democratically elected petitioners on this technical ground.

6.

Learned advocate for the respondents vehemently opposed

the writ petition contending that the petitioners have not placed

on record the complete copy of the order passed by the

{4}

wp3796-22

Commissioner refusing stay to the petitioners. The petitioners

have only placed on record the copy of the letter intimating them

that their stay application is rejected. He pointed out the note

below the said letter, which states that if certified copy of the

dec