1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.476 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO.2712 OF 2010 (Vijay s/o Sitaram Raut vs. The Collector, Yavatmal and another) __________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Shri N.S. Khandewale, Advocate for appellant. Ms. R. Deshpande, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent no.1. ----------- CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND A.B. CHAUDHARI, JJ. DATED : OCTOBER 21, 2010 Heard learned Counsel for the parties. In the proceedings for disqualification before the Collector under the Maharashtra Local Authority Members' Disqualification Act, 1986, a preliminary objection was raised by the appellant to the maintainability of proceedings on certain grounds. The Collector rejected the preliminary objection against which writ petition came to be filed before the learned Single Judge, who rejected the 2 writ petition. We find that the learned Single Judge has reserved liberty in favour of the appellant to raise the said objection again before the Collector. We quote the following portion from the order of the learned Single Judge : “Looking to the nature of controversy, I find that ends of justice can be met with by permitting respondent no.1 – Collector to reconsider the objection as raised after the necessary evidence is adduced by the parties. The facts relevant for contentions being raised before this Court by petitioner can be brought on record before Collector and then Collector shall consider those facts in the light of judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court and the law.” In our opinion, the aforesaid extract of the order of the learned Single Judge takes sufficient care of the parties. The letters patent appeal is, therefore, disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE khj 3