1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 6002 of 2011 Mohd. Arif s/o Mohd. Ayyub Vs. The Returning Officer, Municipal Council and others. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. Anand Parchure, counsel for the Petitioner. Mr. N.R. Rode, AGP for the respondent no.1. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK J. DATE : 8 th December, 2011. Heard. The nomination form of the petitioner was rejected as though the party under which the petitioner was contesting was not 'recognized political party' and was merely a 'registered political party', the nomination was not proposed by five voters. According to the relevant rule, only in case of a candidate belonging to a 'recognized political party', the nomination could have been proposed by one voter. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was not contesting the election as a member of a 'recognized political party', recognized as a national party or as a State party under the Election Symbol (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1958. The petitioner belonged to a registered political party which was registered with the State Election Commission. Since the nomination of the petitioner could have been proposed by one voter only in 2 case the petitioner belongs to a registered political party and since the petitioner did not belong to a recognized political party and belonged merely to a registered political party, the Returning Officer did not commit any error in rejecting he nomination form of the petitioner as it was proposed by only one voter. There is no error in the order passed by the Returning Officer, as also the judgment passed by the District Judge dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner. In the result, the writ petition fails and is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE Hirekhan.