1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5224 OF 2010 Kishor Bhimrao Mali Age : 33 years, Occ : Agriculture, R/o Kalamsare Post Dahiwad, Tq.Shirpur, Dist.Dhule. ..Petitioner -VERSUS- 1. The State of Maharashtra Through Secretary, Gramvikas Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32. (Copy to be served in the office of Govt. Pleader, Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad) 2. Returning Officer for the election of Kalamsare Grampanchayat, Post Dahiwad, Tq.Shirpur, Dist.Dhule. 3. State Election Commission, Maharshtra State, Mumbai. (Copies of Respondent Nos.2 and 3 to be served on Standing counsel High Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad). 4. Tahsildar, Shirpur, Tq.Shirpur, Dist.Dhule. 5. Yeshwant Damu Kalal Age : 40 years, Occ : Agriculture, 6. Vimalabai Yeshwant Kalal Age : 35 years, Occ : Agriculture, 7. Ashabai Bharat More Age : 24 years, Occ : Agriculture, 2 8. Vijay Narayan Mali Age : 25 years, Occ : Agriculture, Respondent Nos.5 to 8 are R/o Kalamsare, Post Dahiwad, Tq.Shirpur, Dist.Dhule. ..Respondents .... Mr.S.S. Randive, Advocate for petitioner. Mr.S.T. Shelke, Advocate for respondent nos.2 and 3. Mr.D.R. Korade, A.G.P. for respondent nos.1 and 4. Mr.S.P. Brahme, Advocate for respondent no.8. .... (CORAM : V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.) DATE : 17th June, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner's nomination paper was rejected by the Returning Officer on the ground that the petitioner did not produce caste validity certificate. 3. The requirement of Section 10-1(A) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958 along with the Government Resolution dated 9th June, 2010, purport to show that concession of grace period of four months is granted only in respect of furnishing of the caste validity certificate. It is necessary for the candidate to place on record or file evidence to show that he has applied for caste validity certificate, prior to filing of nomination paper and has also to submit caste certificate in order to show that he is eligible to file the nomination paper from the reserved constituency. The 3 petitioner has not submitted either caste certificate or receipt about submitting the application that he has moved competent authority for obtaining the validity certificate about his caste after verification. The petitioner has thus not complied with any of the requirements, as contemplated under Section 10-1(A) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958 or that of the Government Resolution dated 9th June, 2010. The rejection of his nomination paper can not therefore be faulted with. Hence, the petition is dismissed. No costs. (V.R.KINGAONKAR) JUDGE gas/wp5224.10