-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8723 OF 2009 Shivaji Laxman Jadhav. ..Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra & Others. ..Respondents. Mr. R. V. Bansode for the petitioner. Mrs. M. P. Thakur, AGP for the Respondent – State. Coram : R. V. MORE, J. Date : August 24, 2010. P. C. : 1. In the general election held in October 2007, the petitioner was elected as member of the grampanchayat Nanegaon and thereafter on 26th November 2007 he was elected as Sarpanch. Respondent nos. 4 & 5 on 10th March 2008 filed complaint before respondent no.3 alleging that the petitoiner is disqualified from holding the post of Sarpanch as well as Member of the Grampanchayat as he has begotten 3 children after the cut off date,namely, 12th September 2001. The Collector after hearing the petitioner and respondent nos.4 & 5, disqualified the petitioner under section 14(1)(j) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958. This order is confirmed by the Additional Commissioner in an appeal and therefore the present petition. 2. The petitioner has 3 issues, namely, Dhanashree born on 31st srp -: 2 :- March 2004, Vaishnavee born on 22nd February 2006 and a son born on 2nd October 2007. The birth certificates of these children disclose that name of their father is Shivaji Laxman Bongane. The petitioner contends that his name is Shivaji Laxman Jadhav and therefore disputes the birth certificates. Both the authorities, however, relying upon documentary evidence recorded finding that the person calling himself by name Shivaji Laxman Bongane and person by name Shivaji Laxman Jadhav residing in village Nanegaon are not two different persons but one and the same person. It is clear from the birth certificates of the children of the petitioner, that the petitioner has begotten 3rd child after the cut off date. In the light of these facts, I find that the Collector and Additional Commissioner has rightly disqualified the petitioner under the provisions of section 14(1)(j­1) of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act. I do not see any reason to entertain the writ petition and interfere with the impugned order in extra­ordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Petition is therefore dismissed. (R.V. MORE, J.)