The court dismissed the petition denying the petitioner a change of ward. Ruling that the nomination form unambiguously selected ward 1(B) and was duly accepted, the court held post-submission changes are impermissible.
No change in ward of candidature allowed; writ petition dismissed with no costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1 54-WP-53-2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 53 OF 2021
Sangita W/o. Gangadhar Kokane
...Petitioner
Versus
State Election Commission, Maharashtra State, Through its Returning Officer and Ors.
...Respondents
Mr R.V. Gore, Advocate for Petitioner Mr A.B. Kadethankar, Advocate for Respondent No. 1 Mr S.K. Tambe, A.G.P. for Respondent-State
CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA AND SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.
DATE : 11th JANUARY, 2021
PER COURT :
2 54-WP-53-2021
[ SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J. ] [ S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ]
mta
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner can change the ward of candidature after submission after a clerical error in the online form.
Whether the Returning Officer erred by accepting the nomination from ward No. 1(B) instead of ward No. 2.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sangita W/o. Gangadhar Kokane
State Election Commission, Maharashtra State
S.V. GANGAPURWALA
SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
