1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 1780 OF 2010 (Anita s/o Santosh Naitam vs. Returning Officer, Gram Panchayat, Charmorshi) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. APRIL 15, 2010. Heard Shri Mardikar with Shri Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Mujumdar, learned AGP for the respondent. The contention is, on 12.04.2010, the respondent rejected nomination paper of the petitioner on the ground that the husband of the petitioner has been given a contract of collecting market dues. By inviting attention to Section 14(1)(g) of Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958, the learned counsel contends that as the contract is given to husband, the petitioner has no involvement or interest in it and she could not have been disqualified on that account. The learned AGP relies upon the express language of Section 14(1)(g) of the Act, to support the order. A person who has direct or indirect interest is disqualified under that provision. Here, the husband of the petitioner admittedly has got interest. In this 2 situation, I do not find anything wrong with the view taken by the respondent. No case is made out warranting any interference in writ jurisdiction. Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.