1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.3865 OF 2011 _______________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _______________________|_______________________________________ CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J. Date : 16.06.2011. 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner had filed proceedings seeking disqualification of the present Respondent No.4 as a Member of the Municipal Council on the ground that the Respondent No.4 has committed encroachment on the Government land. The said application was rejected by the Collector, Jalgaon on the ground that the petitioner has already filed Election Petition. The same is assailed in the present Writ Petition. 3. Mr.Phatke, learned counsel for the Respondent raises a preliminary objection against 2 the impugned order that substantive appeal is provided U/s 44(4) of Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Township Act, 1965. 4. Mr.Patil, learned counsel relying on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in a case of "Rajan Ramnath Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra and others" reported in 2001(3) Mh.L.J. 202, submits that when the order is passed without jurisdiction, the alternate remedy is no bar to entertain the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. According to the learned counsel, the Collector had committed an error in coming to the conclusion that the proceedings are not maintainable as the petitioner has filed Election Petition. As such there is no impediment for this Court to entertain the present Writ Petition. 5. The rule of alternate remedy is a rule of self-restraint. No doubt, availability of an alternate remedy is no bar to entertain a Writ Petition but at the same time when efficacious alternate remedy is available, more so, when the 3 remedy is in the shape of a substantive statutory appeal, in such cases the party deserves to be relegated to the said remedy. The fact that inspite of filing an election petition, still, the proceedings before the Collector were maintainable can be agitated before the appellate authority. 6. In view of the availability of the alternate remedy, I am not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition. The Writ Petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail the alternate remedy available to him. In case, the petitioner files an appeal before the appropriate authority, the authority shall consider the time spent in prosecuting the present Writ Petition. No costs. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) Dt.16.06.2011. asp/office/wp3865.11 4