FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5423 OF 2011 "Mohmood Khan Haider Khan Pathan Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others." Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 1 Mr. H.I. Pathan, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. P.P. More,Assistant Govt. Pleader for respondent No.1. Mr. S.T. Shelke, Advocate for respondent No.2 Mr. R.V. Naiknavare, Advocate for respondent No.4. CORAM :- B.R. GAVAI & R.M. BORDE, JJ. DATE :- 5TH SEPTEMBER, 2011. PER COURT :- 1] By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the demarcation of wards, as done by respondent No.3, basically on the ground that the same is in violation of condition Nos. 3 and 4 of the directions issued by the State Election Commission. 2] The basic grievance of the petitioner is that condition No.3, which requires big road to be taken into consideration for demarcation and condition No.4, which requires numbering to be given from North to South, have been violated. 3] The reconstitution of the wards is required on account of establishment of a multi-member constituency. While demarcating the wards, several factors including the population etc. are required to be taken into consideration. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5423 OF 2011 "Mohmood Khan Haider Khan Pathan Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others." Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 2 4] The earlier 17 wards have now been converted into only 4 wards on account of multi-member constituencies. From the perusal of the map, it cannot be said that wards so constituted are geographically inconvenient. Normally, in such matters, some free play is always to be given to the authorities. Unless it is found that the exercise taken by the authorities is malafide or arbitrary, causing inconvenience to the public at large, no interference is warranted. In that view of the matter, no case is made out for interference. Hence, the writ petition is rejected. [R.M. BORDE,J.] [B.R. GAVAI, J.] grt/-