1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.7065 OF 2007 Amrutrao s/o Deorao Sarnaik(Kendrekar), R/o-Kendra(Bk.), Tq-Sengaon, Dist-Hingoli. ...PETITIONER. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through Secretary, Rural Development & Gram Vikas Mantralaya, Mumbai, 2) The State Election Commissioner, Mumbai, 3) The Collector, Hingoli, Dist-Hingoli, 4) The Tahsildar, Sengaon, Tq-Sengaon, Dist-Hingoli, 5) Shri. S.N. Raut, Returning Officer, Gram Panchayat, Kendra Bk. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri. B.S. Kudale Advocate for Petitioner. Shri. S.K. Kadam, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4. Shri. S.T. Shelke, Advocate for Respondent No.2. ... 2 CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, JJ. DATE : 2ND DECEMBER, 2010. PER COURT : 1. The Petitioner submits that he is a member of Kendra Bk. Gram Panchayat. Election of Sarpanch and Up-Sarpanch were to be held. The date of election was fixed by Tahsildar. According to the Petitioner, in accordance with the provisions of Section 33 of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, the Collector has to fix the date of election. It is further submitted by the Petitioner that the elections for the posts of Sarpanch and Up-Sarpanch were held on 8th November, 2007. Prior to that, Tahsildar has fixed the date. The Writ Petition has been filed on 7th December, 2007. This Court issued notices on 7th December, 2007. The learned counsel for the Petitioner has placed reliance on the reported Judgment in the case of Sitaram Bansi Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and others, 1998 (2) Mh. L.J. 3 Page 79, in support of his submissions that as the Tahsildar had no power to fix the date of election, the election proceedings are required to be quashed and set aside. 2. We have gone through the Judgment cited supra. We find that the elections were already held prior to near about 3 years. The term of village panchayat is for 5 years. Section 15 of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act provides remedy to challenge the election. The Petitioner admittedly, has not challenged the election by filing election petition. The Petition, at admission stage, is being argued after near about 3 years. Taking into consideration all these facts and circumstances, we are not inclined to exercise our extra ordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Writ Petition is dismissed. [SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.] asb/NOV10/wp7065.07