(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 5053 OF 2001 Chabildas Tukaram Khadke, Age : 62 years, Occupation : Agriculturist, R/o. 278, Vithal Peth, Jalgaon. .. Petitioner. versus 1. Returning Officer & Sub-Divisional Officer appointed for Jalgaon Municipal Council, General Elections 2001, Jalgaon. 2. Municipal Council, Jalgaon, Through its Chief Officer, Jalgaon. 3. District Collector, Jalgaon as District Election Officer, Jalgaon. 4. The State Election Commission, Through its Commissioner, New Administrative Building, First Floor, Opposite Mantralaya, Mumbai. 5. The State of Maharashtra . (2) 6. Khadke Nandu Tukaram, .. Respondent no.4 Age : Major, deleted as per Occupation : Business, court's order dated R/o. Mehrun Survey No. 31/2, 7-12-2001 Plot No. 54, Ayodhya Nagar, Jalgaon. 7. Patel Ibrahim Musa, Age : Major, Occupation : Business, R/o. Plot No. 30, Ganeshpuri, Mehrun, Jalgaon. 8. Sonawne Ramesh Totaram, .. Respondent no.8 Age : Major, deleted as per Occupation : Business, court's order dated R/o. 46, Rameshwar Colony, 7-12-2001 Mehrun, Jalgaon. 9. Bhangale Rajendra Sonu, Age : Major, Occupation : Business, R/o. Plot No. 15, 40/4/A, Sadguru Nagar, MIDC, Jalgaon. 10.Marathe Balubhau Goverdhan, Age : Major, Occupation : Business, Plot No. 16, Sadguru Nagar, Jalgaon. .. Respondents. ....................... (3) Mr. V.J. Dixit, Senior Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. S.T. Shelke, Advocate, for respondent nos.1 and 4. Mr. V.D. Gunale, Advocate, for respondent no.2. Mr. D.R. Korde, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent nos.3 and 5. Respondent nos. 6 and 8 deleted. Mr. S.G. Patil, Advocate, for respondent no.7. Mr. L.V. Sangeet, Advocate, for respondent no.9. Mr. R.R. Mantri, Advocate, for respondent no.10. ........................ CORAM : A.P. DESHPANDE & N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 2ND MARCH 2010 COURT'S ORDER : 1. On account of rejection of the nomination form submitted by the petitioner, for the post of President, Municipal Council, Jalgaon, this petition was filed. 2. By passage of time, the petition is rendered infructuous. (4) 3. Hence, the petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. Rule is discharged. There shall be no order as to costs. ( N.D. DESHPANDE ) ( A.P. DESHPANDE ) JUDGE JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp5053