1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9724 OF 2010 Kashibai w/o Sudhakar More .. PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. A.M. Gaikwad, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.J. Ghute Patil, AGP for the State. Mr. S.T. Shelke, advocate for respondent no. 3. Mr. U.B. Bilolikar, advocate for respondent no. 2. Mr. Temkar, advocate for respondent no. 6. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 9726 OF 2010 Maroti Gangaram Gharke .. PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. A.M. Gaikwad, advocate for the petitioner. Smt. Y.M. Kshirsagar, AGP for the State. Mr. S.T. Shelke, advocate for respondent no. 3. Mr. U.B. Bilolikar, advocate for respondent no. 5. Mr. Temkar, advocate for respondent no. 6. 2 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 9727 OF 2010 Vishwambar Mohanrao Kalewar .. PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. A.M. Gaikwad, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.J. Ghute Patil, AGP for the State. Mr. S.T. Shelke, advocate for respondent nos. 2 to 4. Mr. U.B. Bilolikar, advocate for respondent no. 5. Mr. Temkar, advocate for respondent no. 6. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 9728 OF 2010 Yashodabai Deoba Hanwate .. PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. A.M. Gaikwad, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.J. Ghute Patil, AGP for the State. Mr. S.T. Shelke, advocate for respondent nos. 2 to 4. Mr. U.B. Bilolikar, advocate for respondent no. 5. Mr. Temkar, advocate for respondent no. 6. 3 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 9729 OF 2010 Nagorao Babji Hanwate .. PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. A.M. Gaikwad, advocate for the petitioner. Smt. Y.M. Kshirsagar, AGP for the State. Mr. S.T. Shelke, advocate for respondent no. 3. Mr. U.B. Bilolikar, advocate for respondent no. 5. Mr. Temkar, advocate for respondent no. 6. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 9731 OF 2010 Sudarshan Sheshrao Kandejod .. PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. A.M. Gaikwad, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.J. Ghute Patil, AGP for the State. Mr. S.T. Shelke, advocate for respondent nos. 2 to 4. Mr. U.B. Bilolikar, advocate for respondent no. 5. Mr. Temkar, advocate for respondent no. 6. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 9733 OF 2010 4 Premalabai Raghunath Atalkar .. PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. A.M. Gaikwad, advocate for the petitioner. Smt. Y.M. Kshirsagar, AGP for the State. Mr. S.T. Shelke, advocate for respondent no. 3. Mr. U.B. Bilolikar, advocate for respondent no. 5. Mr. Temkar, advocate for respondent no. 6. ===== CORAM : R. M. BORDE, J. DATE : 19 th OCTOBER, 2010. PER COURT : 1 The action of acceptance of nomination papers presented by respective respondents is subjected to challenge in these petitions. It is contended that the contesting candidates are defaulters within meaning of section 14(1)(h) of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act and as such are not entitled to participate in the process of election. It is also further contended that the demand notices were served on the family members of the respective respondents claiming recovery of tax. However, inspite of service of notice, they failed to pay any amount. The concerned respondents have 5 presented affidavit in reply and controverted the contentions raised in the petition. It is contended that the demand notices annexed to the petition are false and fabricated and created with a view to oust the concerned respondents from the process of election. Considering the nature of dispute, in exercise of powers conferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, interference is not warranted in the petitions. Petitioners, however, may have option open to present election disputes after completion of process of election. All the petitions stand rejected. 2 Pending civil application, if any, does not survive and stands disposed of. ( R. M. BORDE, J.) dyb/office/wp9724.10.odt