IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 143 OF 2009 SHRI. PRAKASH B. GAONKAR ... Petitioner Versus SHRI. GOPAL SHABA DEIKAR AND 2 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. G. Teles, Advocate for the Petitioner. Coram:- N. A. BRITTO, J. Date:- 4th March, 2009 ORAL ORDER : Heard. 2. The petitioner, herein is a returned candidate whose election is challenged by respondent no.1/petitioner before the Administrative Tribunal. By impugned order dated 10/02/2009, the learned tribunal has allowed respondent no.1/petitioner to produce two documents, admittedly, both being public documents. The contention is that the said documents are not in consonance with the pleadings of the petitioner in the said petition. It may be so. However, this certainly is not a fit case for interference in writ jurisdiction, in the light of the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Surya Dev Rai V/s. Ramchander Rai & Ors. (2003 (6) SCC 675). Hence, the same is dismissed. 3. If the petitioner has any documents to produce in rebuttal, he is always at liberty to apply to the Tribunal. N. A. BRITTO, J. NH