SAU.REKHA Vs. STATE ELECTION COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.Nitin Jachak, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. J. B. Kasat, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 and Mr. N. R. Patil, learned AGP for respondent Nos.2, 3 and 5. There is no need to issue notice to the respondent No.4, as the issue involved in this petition would have to be dealt with only by respondent No.1 and at the most by respondent No.2.

(2.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel for the parties present before the Court.

(3.) It is pointed out by Mr. Kasat, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 and Mr.Patil, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent Nos.2, 3 and 5 that it would be the provision made in Sec. 11 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act of 1965'), which would govern the issue. According to them, the electoral roll of the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly prepared under the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, which is authenticated and notified by the State Election Commissioner, is the list of voters for each ward and in the present case, the electoral roll prepared for the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly, has been declared to be the voters' list for the purpose of Deori Nagar Panchayat as per the notification issued on 01/11/2021 and in this voters' list name of the petitioner having not been included, now her name cannot be included.