1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7752 OF 2010 Annasaheb s/o Bhaurao Mandlik .. PETITIONER VERSUS The State Election Commission Maharashtra through Commissioner & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. V.D. Salunke, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.N. Jadhav, AGP for the State. Mr. S.T. Shelke, advocate for respondent no. 1. ===== CORAM : R. M. BORDE, J. DATE : 3 rd SEPTEMBER, 2010. PER COURT : 1 Nomination paper tendered by the respondent with a view to contest the election to the seat of member of village panchayat Ranjangaon has been accepted by the Returning Officer and the said order of acceptance of nomination paper tendered by the respondent is subjected to challenge in this writ petition. 2 It is contended that the respondent has more than three children 2 living and one child is born after the cut off date. There is record tendered alongwith the petition to substantiate the contention. Respondent / contesting candidate however has tendered affidavit in reply and made a statement that there is no child born to him after the cut off date, as alleged. All the children belonging to the respondent / contesting candidate are born prior to the cut off date. 3 As the petition raises disputed questions of fact, no interference is permissible at this stage. The petitioner, however, shall have opportunity to raise objections at appropriate stage by presenting appropriate proceeding. As the respondent has tendered an affidavit controverting the contentions raised in respect of existence of children, and the date of birth, respondent obviously takes risk and shall be deemed to be aware of the consequences of presenting such an affidavit. Petition does not require any consideration at this stage. Petition stands rejected. 4 Pending civil application, if any, does not survive and stands disposed of. ( R. M. BORDE, J.) dyb/office/wp7752.10.odt