NIRMALA SUESH JADHAV Vs. GAJANAN MAHADEO JADHAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Ghare, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Gandhi, learned counsel for Respondent No.1 and learned AGP for Respondent Nos.2 and 3.

(2.) The concurrent findings recorded by Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 holding that the petitioner stood disqualified under the provisions of Section 14(1)(j-i) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1959, for having begotten three children has been challenged in this petition.

(3.) Mr. Ghare, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is claimed to have three children; (a) Anusaya born on 23/03/2008, (b) Radhika born on 21/11/2009 and (c) Abhishek born on 12.08.2012, out of which the person at Sr.No. (b) Radhjika was not the daughter of the petitioner, but the daughter of sister-in-law namely Nirmala w/o Bhagawan Jadhav. He submits that Nirmala prior to her marriage was also known as Vandana, and Radhika in fact was the daughter of Nirmala, for which reliance is placed upon the birth certificate issued by Reynolds Memorial Hospital and Affiliated Clinics, Washim (page 19) which records that a female child Baby Jadhav was born to Bhagwan Jadhav and Nirmala Jadhav on 21.11.2009, which, according to him, is the clinching proof coupled with the date of birth certificate issued by the Washim Municipal Council under the provisions of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 (page 22), which also records the above position. He therefore submits that the finding rendered by the authorities below was by misconstruing this position, as against the plea advanced that Radhika was the daughter of the petitioner. He therefore submits that the impugned order disqualifying the petitioner cannot be sustained.