1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 3509/2010. Sau. Mina Suresh Gawhale -: VERSUS :- The Returning Officer for village Panchayat and another. 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 : AUGUST 02, 2010. Heard Shri F.T. Mirza, learned counsel for petitioner, Shri Gharote, learned Counsel for Respondent no.2 and learned A.G.P. for respondent no.1. Contention is, bill for amount of Rs. 1015/- has not been served upon father in law of petitioner at any point of time. It is further contended that the Returning Officer has acted mechanically without verifying it properly. Learned AGP has produced relevant records for perusal of this Court. The relevant records show that a demand in Form “A” dated 20.08.2009 for the year 2009-10 for total amount of Rs. 1096/- was there. Current demand is of Rs. 146/- and still Rs. 952/- are in arrears. Hence, even if one goes by rate of current demand the arrears are of last more than 5 years. It is not in dispute that amount of Rs. 2 1015/- has been paid on 26.07.2010 and out of it amount of Rs. 871/- was towards water. Shri Mirza, learned Counsel has tried to urge that the demand as also payments are inconsistent and according to him shows that the demand itself is erroneous. He argues that without any verification the Returning Officer has accepted the outstanding amount. Papers show that even in admitted document dated 26.07.2010 there were arrears which are of last more than 5 years. Thus the disputed question arise and hence, I am not inclined to interfere in writ jurisdiction. Writ Petition is therefore rejected. No costs. However, petitioner is at liberty to file appropriate proceedings for ventilation of his grievances. JUDGE Rgd.