1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.4537/2010 ________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | ________________________________________________________ Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner filed an application dated 29.12.2008 before the Deputy Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Dhule, seeking reference of election dispute to the Court u/s 16(2) of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949. The application is rejected by the authority. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and on going through the relevant provision, it is amply clear that the results of the election were declared on 1.12.2008. If the petitioner was not satisfied with the election result, then within 10 days, he could 2 have filed the application to the District Judge as required u/s 16(1). It is explicit that sub- section (2) of Section 16 would come into operation only when the State Election Commissioner has reason to believe that the election was not fairly conducted or there was undue influence exercised by the elected member or there was bribery. The petitioner could not have bypassed seeking remedy under sub-section (1) by filing such an application. It appears that she filed the application dated 29.12.2008 inasmuch as the period of limitation of 10 days was over. This is impermissible in the eye of law. No interference is warranted in the matter. The petition is disposed of. (V. R. KINGAONKAR , J) Dt/- 12.07.2010 ndk/c1271014