0wp 6020.11.odt 1/2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETN. NO.6020/2011 Vachalabai Ganesh Bansod -vs- Returning Officer, Nagar Parishad and others ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders. or directions and Registrar's orders. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Shri P. S. Wathore, counsel for the petitioner. Mrs.Deshmukh, AGP for the respondent No.1. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : 08.12.2011. By this petition, the petitioner impugns the order of the Election Officer rejecting the nomination paper of the petitioner on the ground that it was not signed by the petitioner as also the order passed by the District Judge dismissing an appeal filed by the petitioner under Section 15 of the Maharashtra Municipalities Election Rules, 1966 challenging the order passed by the Returning Officer. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the nomination form, it appears that the Returning Officer did not commit any error in rejecting the nomination form of the petitioner, as the nomination form was not signed by the petitioner. It is necessary to note that the declaration appended to the nomination form was also not signed by the petitioner. The reliance placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the provisions of Regulation 12 of Chapter III of the State Commission Commission Regulations cannot be of any assistance to the petitioner as the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by Regulation 6E of Chapter IV of 0wp 6020.11.odt 2/2 the same Regulations. Regulation 6E stipulates that if the nomination paper is not signed by the candidate, the same could be rejected. The reliance placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner on an order of this Court dated 16th of August, 2010 in Writ Petition No.3825/2010 is also not well founded as in that case the petitioner therein had forgotten to put her signature only at one place in the nomination form and the nomination form was signed by the petitioner therein, below the verification. In the said decision, the petitioner therein had not signed at the end of the page where it was necessary but had signed the verification and also the nomination form. In such circumstances, this Court held that the absence of signature on the first page of the nomination form was not deliberate and was not a material mistake sufficient to reject the nomination paper. Such is not the case here. A bare perusal of the nomination paper shows that the nomination form is not signed by the petitioner at all and the declaration is also not signed by the petitioner. That would be a material defect as stated in Regulation 6E of Chapter IV. Even otherwise, the list of nominated candidates have been published on 23/11/2011 and the date of withdrawal of nomination forms was 29/11/2011. No relief can be granted to the petitioner on the facts and circumstances of this case, at this stage of the election process. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE KHUNTE