- 1 - Writ Petition No.233/2010 Two grounds have been pressed before us. Firstly, that the respondent no.2 has failed to include the name of the petitioner, though there were good circumstances to indicate that he was voter in the constituency. Therefore, the Authority should have accepted his request for inclusion. Secondly, it is argued that the respondent no.2 ought to have published proposed voters list. Both these grounds deserve to be merely stated to be rejected for the same overlook the provisions of the Act as it appear now on the statute book and more particularly after the amendment of 1996. Prior to 1996, it was possible for the petitioner to argue that his request for inclusion of his name in the list of voters ought to be considered. That was possible in terms of Section 11-A of the Act. However, by amendment of 1996 (Maharashtra Act No.XI of 1996), both the provisions i.e. Sections 11-A and 11-B have been deleted. The only provision with regard to preparation of list of voters as found in Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965, is Section 11 of the Act, which reads thus: - 2 - “11. Preparation of list of voters: The electoral roll of the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly prepared under the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, for the time being in force, on such date as the State Election Commissioner may, by general or special order notify, shall be divided by the State Election Commissioner into different sections corresponding to different wards in the municipal area; and a printed copy of each section of the roll so divided and authenticated by the State Election Commissioner or an officer authorized by him, shall be the list of voters for each ward.” On plain reading of this provision, the authority has to merely divide the electoral roll of the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly prepared under the provisions of the Representation of People Act, 1950, for the time being in force and as per the date to be notified by the State Election Commissioner, which in this case was notified as 30.11.2009. The electoral roll was required to be divided into different sections corresponding to different wards in the Municipal area and a printed copy of each section of the roll so divided and authenticated by the State Election Commissioner or an officer authorized by him would be treated as list of voters for each ward. There is no requirement of publication of draft voters list or inviting objections as is sought to be contended by the petitioner. That is not the regime of Section 11 of the Act of 1965, which obviously has been adopted with purpose to avoid multiplicity or repetition of - 3 - the same exercise for the elections to be held for Legislative Assembly as well as Municipal Council. It is a different matter that the voters list is published by the authorities, which however, is not the statutory requirement. However, we are informed across the Bar, that it is done only to correct clerical errors appearing in the divided electoral roll. Taking any view of the matter, therefore, no relief can be granted to the petitioner in this petition. The second argument of the petitioner about publication of the electoral roll is also misconceived as there is no such statutory requirement. Notably, the petition proceeds on a misconception that the petitioner no.1 has a fundamental right to contest the election, as is stated in para 20 of the petition. By now, it is well established position that to participate in an election is not a fundamental right, but a statutory right available to a citizen. Hence, the petition is dismissed. (A.M. Khanwilkar, J.) (S.S. Shinde, J.) Dt/- 19.01.2010 ndk/c1911017