TUKARAM PATIL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition order of rejection by the Returning Officer, of the petitioner's candidature (Ex. C) is impugned. In the said order, it has been mentioned that the petitioner was a surety of one Laxman Gopal Gurav who was a debtor of the Society named in that order. According to the petitioner there was no amount outstanding from Gurav to the said Society on the date of rejection and hence the fact that the petitioner was a surety was totally irrelevant. The peti'ioner has stated on oath that no amount was outstanding by the said Gurav to Dutta Co-operative Milk Society,

(2.) We feel that the petitioner should be given an opportunity on this limited question, but we want to make it clear that the opportunity is not as to the technicalities as to whether a debtor or borrower is a defaulter or not or whether the surety can be regarded as a defaulter if an express demand has not been made on him. We propose to quash the order and to allow the petitioner to have a limited opportunity to show that there was no amount due on the date of rejection of his nomination paper by the said Gurav to the said Society. If the petitioner is able to lead the necessary evidence before the Returning Officer that all debts as were repayable have been duly repaid, the Returning Officer will come to the conclusion that neither Gurav nor the petitioner can be regarded as defaulter and allow the nomination. If on the other hand, the amounts are outstanding from Gurav which Gurav has not paid despite demands by the Society, the rejection of the petitioner's nomination will stand. In the order the petitioner is also mentioned to be a surety of one Oattu Govind Patil who is also alleged to be a debton of the Balbhim Vividha Karyakari Sahakari Society. Whatever we have stated as regerds Gurav will apply mutatis mutandis to the said party and his indebtedness to the 3rd respondent, Society.

(3.) In the result, the order of rejection is quashed and the matter remanded back for reconsideration on the footing indicated above. Parties to bear their own costs of the Writ Petition.