SACHIN CHINTAMAN JADHAV Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner raised an objection to the nomination of the respondent No.6 who was desirous of contesting Gram Panchayat election for the year 2020-2021.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order does not record any reason but straightway proceeds to reject the application made by the petitioner. Learned counsel further pointed out that for the earlier term the respondent No.6 contested the election from the reserved category of Other Backward Class - Kunbi and was elected. However, his caste certificate came to be invalidated and the order of the Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee was confirmed right upto this Court. In these circumstances, he was disqualified for the remainder of the term and with a retrospective effect. Learned counsel would therefore relying on the provisions of Section 14(c)(i) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act ('the said Act' for short) submitted that as the respondent No.6 was removed for a misbehaviour, there is a bar for his contesting any election for a period of five years from the date of his removal. In his submission, all these aspects have not been taken into consideration by the Returning Officer and without recording any reasons the application has been rejected.