-1- IN IN IN THE THE THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE APPELLATE APPELLATE JURISDICTION JURISDICTION JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.5582 OF 2007 NO.5582 OF 2007 NO.5582 OF 2007 Shyam D. Satpute ...Petitioner v/s The Chief Election Officer, Municipal Corporation, Pune and ors. ...Respondents Ms Seema Sarnaik i/b Ms Shubhangi Borade for Petitioner. Mr R.G. Ketkar for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr R.D. Rane, G.P. for Respondent No.14. CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH AND V.M. KANADE JJ. DATE : 7TH JANUARY 2008. -2- P.C. :- 1. The petitioner, who is unsuccessful candidate in the elections of Pune Municipal Corporation, has filed this petition challenging election of the respondent No.6 as a Councillor of the Pune Municipal Corporation. Apart from the fact that there is alternate remedy provided by the statute, which has not been adopted, in our opinion, the petition is so frivolous that it is liable to be rejected by imposing exemplary cost. 2. According to the petitioner, the election of respondent No.6 as a Councillor of the Pune Municipal Corporation is invalid because he has not take permission of his employer, which is a College affiliated to Pune University, before contesting the elections of Corporation. It is elementary that the requirement included in the Rules framed under the Maharashtra Universities Act, which regulate the conditions of service of teachers working under the University, has nexus with the services of the person concerned and has nothing to do with the validity or invalidity of the election as a Councillor of the local body. Assuming that the respondent No.6 is in the employment of affiliated College and for contesting -3- election, he has not taken permission of his employer, that may make him liable for action by his employer, it cannot disqualify him from the Councillorship unless there is a provision made in the Corporation Act to that effect. Admittedly, there is no such provision in the Corporation Act. Obviously therefore, there is no substance in the petition. Not only this petition was filed challenging the election of respondent No.6 on a most frivolous ground, but valuable time of the Court was consumed in arguing the petition. In our opinion, merely rejecting petition will not serve the interest of justice, but the interest of justice would be subserved by imposing exemplary cost on the petitioner for abusing the process of law. Petition is rejected. Petitioner is directed to pay to the Pune Municipal Corporation as and by way of cost of this petition Rs.10,000/-. . Parties to act on the copy of this order duly authenticated by the Sheristedar / Private Secretary of the Court. . Certified copy expedited. ( D.K. DESHMUKH J.) ( V.M. KANADE J.)