1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 5964/2010. Smt. Mala Raju Pethe -: VERSUS :- Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur and others. 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. DATED : DECEMBER 14, 2010. Heard Shri V.D. Muley, learned Counsel for petitioner and learned A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 and 2. No confidence motion against the petitioner has been held to be validly passed by both the authorities. Contentions that its notice was not properly served; that there was demand for secret ballot and that some of the members had incurred disqualification, were all looked into and found misconceived. Before this Court, contention is, the allegations contained in motion which formed the basis of no confidence have been proved. It is settled law that the correctness or truth of those allegations is not required to 2 be proved. The second contention is, in appeal memo ground that petitioner demanded voting by secret ballot was specifically raised. The ground is considered by both the Authorities. There is no grievance that the Presiding Officer ignored that request or that request was made to record it or he refused to record it. One of the member who attended the meeting was in favour of petitioner and his affidavit in support of this contention is not filed. I therefore, do not find any jurisdictional error or perversity. Petition is thus rejected. No costs. JUDGE Rgd.