The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the nomination of disqualified candidates on encroachment grounds, holding that voting was in progress and the matter could not be entertained at the stage.
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.
996-wp-705-21
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 705 OF 2021
Laxminarayan S/o Chotelal Rathod... Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
and others... Respondents.
Mr. Sanjaykumar Chavan, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. S.G. Karlekar, A.G.P. for Respondents / State.
Mr. A.B. Kadethankar, Advocate for respondent No.2.
CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA AND SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.
DATE : 15th JANUARY, 2021
PER COURT:-
1.Mr. Chavan, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
objection filed by the petitioner to the nomination of respondent Nos.
6 to 12 is not considered by the Election Officer / Returning Officer.
The respondent Nos. 6 to 12 are the encroachers of the government
land and they are disqualified to contest the election. The said aspect
is not considered.
1 of 2
996-wp-705-21
2
2. The voting is scheduled today and the same is in process. It would not be appropriate to entertain the writ petition at this stage. The petitioner may avail the remedy as may be permissible under law.
3. Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
( SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI ) ( S.V. GANGAPURWALA ) JUDGE JUDGE
S.P. Rane
2 of 2
Laxminarayan S/o Chotelal Rathod
The State of Maharashtra
S.V. Gangapurwala
Shrikant D. Kulkarni
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court