BABURAO SHANKARRAO WADIKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The episode in this proceeding is disturbing as also alarming and it has an undercurrent that at very level a feeling of frustration or helplessness was sought to be exhibited. The episode has very severe dimensions and its impact is equally severe so much so that it has practically reduced the machinery in democratic principles almost to a mockery. If this undercurrent of frustration and haplessness is allowed to be carried forward even on this forum, it would add insult to the injury and furthermore the facts are so manifestly alarming that those contribute in making the present proceeding as manifestly a fit case where the technicalities should not be allowed to over-shadow the interest of justice and what is more important is that in such situation, though are rare by itself but nonetheless real in effect, the Court cannot assume the role of a passive and silent spectator. This has become absolutely necessary to instill the faith of the people in the democratic principle as well as in the system of administration of justice. In view of the heavy dimensions and the various shades of the controversy generated by the parties and in the context of certain settled principles we have been extremely cautious and careful to assess the situation before arriving at a particular decision. It is with this prelude that we refer to the factual aspects in the instant case.

(2.) A hot contest in all types of election is not an un-usual feature. However, the said contest had developed such distorted edges that ultimately it resulted into causing panic so much so that about 18 persons sustained injuries and when they knocked the doors of different machineries they had to come with frustration because each agency felt that no protection could be given to them. A small town Murum located in Osmanabad District prominently figures in this proceeding. Elections to the Municipal Council to the said town were announced as we are told that till that day the same was being administered by the administrator. The people, therefore, were obviously happy to have a popular body to control the working of that town. This happiness, however, was short-lived because it could not be translated into action and it could not materialise. As per the relevant provisions of the Maharashtra Municipalities Act, 1965 certain formalities are required to be observed. Different Wards are to be carved out for which purpose certain guidelines are framed with reference to the population. Electoral process is to be prepared for which certain formalities are to be observed. A voting right accrues in favour of a person who qualifiers as prescribed under the Act. It is thereafter that an election programme is to be chalked out by the Collector of the said District in pursuance of which ultimately poll is to be taken. The announcement of the programme finds in the shape of filing the nominations while its culmination finds in the shape of voting and ultimately counting of the votes with the final result of declaration of successful candidates. All the programmes are sandwiched in these different stages. In consonance with these provision of the Collector, Osmanabad declared the election programme and the first stage pertained to the filing of the nomination papers. Those formalities are to be in consonance with the rules framed under the Act which are styled as the Maharashtra Municipalities Election Rules 1966. Rule 4 prescribes fixation of various stages of election. We will have an occasion to refer to some of these rules in proper context. Suffice it is to observe that the people were informed that the nomination papers would be accepted between 23rd of March, 1985 and 4th of April, 1985. Thus 4th of April was the last scheduled date in this stage of filing of the nominations. It so occurred, for some reasons, which however are not difficult to imagine, that right upto the 2nd of April there was no acceleration as such on the part of the prospective candidates to file nomination papers. It is on the 2nd of April, 1985 that only one person entered the arena of the contest and filed the nomination paper and who is added as respondent No. 26 in writ petition. However, there was an accelerated tempo on the 4th of April, 1985 which was the last date for filing of the nomination papers. The entire incident occurred on that fateful day. The timing available for accepting the nomination papers on that day was between 11.00 a.m. and 3.00 p.m. meaning thereby that no one was permitted to file the nomination paper after the scheduled time of 3.00 a.m. The Collector had appointed the fourth respondent herein as the Returning Officer as per the rules prescribed and the fifth respondent was appointed as the Assistant Returning Officer. Their respective duties are prescribed under the rules.

(3.) That some incident did occur on the 4th of April, 1985 within the compound of the Municipal Council at Murum is beyond any pale of controversy. On the contrary not only the petitioners and the contesting respondents but even the officials are unanimous on this point. The only controversy pertains to the divergence in the two versions given by the petitioners and the respondents as to how the incident occurred. Obviously one party tried to put the blame at the door of the other and there is a counter claim on the part of the other side in that behalf. We may observe at this juncture itself that we are not really much concerned with the root cause of the whole problem as the post-mortem of the incident is not the relevant requirement of this proceeding. On the contrary, the more relevant feature is that as to what is the impact of that consequence and the relief that is being claimed and, therefore, we only incidentally refer to some of the features in that field.