1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4821 OF 2009 Office notes, office memoranda of Corum, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s Judge’s orders. Mr. Subhash K. Gaikwad, Counsel for Petitioner. Mr. N.H.Borade, A.G.P. for State. ................... [ CORAM : K.K.TATED, J. ] DATE : 24/7/2009 PER COURT : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. Heard Mr. Subhash K. Gaikwad counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner and Mr. 2 N.H. Borade, learned A.G.P. for respondent. 3. In this Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the Order dated 15/6/2009 passed by the Divisional Commissioner at Aurangabad in Appeal/CR/206/2008. It is the case of the petitioner that in 2007, he was elected as Sarpanch of village Yeota, Tq. Jafrabad, Dist. Jalna and thereafter on 6/2/2008, Respondent nos. 2 and 3 filed complaint before the Additional Collector at Jalna on the ground that the petitioner’s child is born on 19/12/2001. The said complaint under Section 14 (1) (j) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act decided by the Collector on 31/3/2008. On the basis of Birth Certificate issued by the Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad regarding birth date of petitioner’s son Digamber dated 19/12/2001. 4. Being aggrieved by the said Order, 3 petitioner preferred Appeal No. 206 of 2008 with the Divisional Commissioner at Aurangabad under Section 16 (2) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958. The Additional Divisional Commissioner also dismissed Appeal on the same ground as held by lower authority. 5. The learned A.G.P. on behalf of State pointed out that the Birth certificate issued by Aurangabad Municipal Corporation dated 19/12/2001 shows that the petitioner was not qualified in the election of Gram Panchayat. It is admitted fact that the petitioner has not brought any other document on record to show that the Birth Certificate dated 19/12/2001 is fabricated document. 6. In any case, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, it is not possible to scrutinize the documentary evidence produced by the petitioner on record. Considering the Order 4 passed by both the authorities, I do not find any substance in the present Writ Petition and the same is dismissed. [ K.K.TATED ] JUDGE knp/WP2450.09 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13