1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 3540 OF 2010. Pradip Laxman Barabde -: VERSUS :- The Collector, Akola and others. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : AUGUST 04, 2010. Heard Shri M.N. Ingley, learned Counsel for petitioner and Shri Sonare, learned AGP for respondents No. 1 & 2. Petitioner contends that all his arrears to Gram Panchayat were paid on 21.07.2010 i.e. prior to the last date prescribed for filing of nomination. The payment of part of amount by his father for father’s property after such last date i.e. on 26.07.2010 is therefore not relevant. Learned A.G.P. points out that the nomination paper has been rejected with finding that petitioner and his father are joint. The bill of demand was served upon father on 27.04.2010 which included current charges as also arrears and arrears were for more than 4 years. Only part of amount was paid on 21.07.2010 by father and balance was paid on 26.07.2010. Hence, according to him the payment is not the 2 period contemplated by explanation to Section 14[1][h]of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act. Shri Ingley, learned Counsel contends that explanation is applicable only to candidate and not to his father and payment within 90 days father is valid. Fact that father of petitioner was in arrears on last date prescribed for nomination i.e. 24.07.2010 has sufficiently come on record. I, am therefore, not inclined to interfere in the matter in writ jurisdiction. Petitioner is free to raise all his contentions before appropriate forum, in accordance with law. Writ Petition is therefore, rejected with no order as to costs. JUDGE Rgd.