SUNIL RAMESHCHANDRA KEDIA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the Order dated 20th November, 2008, passed by respondent No. 2. District Deputy Registrar in Appeal preferred by respondent No. 5 against acceptance of nomination paper of present petitioner for election to the post of Member of respondent No. 4 A.P.M.C.-Khamgaon. Respondent No. 3 is the Election Officer for the said elections which are conducted as per provisions of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Development & Regulation) Act, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as A.P.M.C. Act) [sic Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1963] and Maharashtra Agricultural Produce (Agricultural Development and Regulation) Rules, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as A.P.M.C. Rules).

(2.) The respondent No. 1 before this Court is the State Government of Maharashtra. As per the election programme, the elections are scheduled on 14th December, 2008. On 24th November, 2008, it was pointed out to this Court that remedy of filing election petition earlier available vide Rule 88 of A.P.M.C. Rules is not now available as said Rule 88 has been deleted. None of the parties have raised any objection to maintainability of writ petition before this Court against the order of respondent No. 2.

(3.) The election programme for elections of respondent No. 4 came to be published on 10th November, 2008 and the scrutiny of nominations took place on 10th November and 11th November, 2008. As there was no objection to the nomination paper of the present respondent, the same was accepted on 11th November, 2008. The respondent No. 5 filed appeal before respondent No. 2 under Rule 51 of A.P.M.C. Rules on or about 17.11.2008 and challenged acceptance of nomination paper of the petitioner. The list of validly nominated candidate was to be published on 21.11.2008 and before that i.e. on 20.11.2008 respondent No. 2 . District Deputy Registrar allowed the appeal. This Court in its order dated 24th November, 2008, rejected the request of petitioner to include his name in the list of validly nominated candidates which came to be published on 25.11.2008 after observing that if ultimately the petitioner succeeds, his name can be directed to be added and he can be permitted to contest the election. The matter was directed to be placed on 27.11.2008 for final hearing. Accordingly the parties have been heard finally.