AJN 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.83 OF 2008 IN WRIT PETITION NO.5350 OF 2007 Ms. Nirottama Purushottam Deore ... Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents Mr. R.K. Mendadkar for the applicant. Ms. M.P. Thakur, A.G.P. for the State. Mr. Sachin Shetye for respondent 5-State Election Commission. CORAM : SMT. RANJANA DESAI & SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, JJ. DATED : JANUARY 21, 2008. P.C.:- 1. The applicant has filed the instant petition challenging order dated 6/6/2007 passed by the Scheduled Tribe Caste Scrutiny Committee, Nasik, invalidating her caste certificate. On this petition, Rule is issued and the rule is made returnable after four AJN 2 weeks. 2. The applicant has filed Civil Application No.2913 of 2007 praying that the Zilla Parishad and the State Election Commission shall not take any adverse action against the applicant on the ground that her caste certificate has been invalidated, till final hearing and disposal of the instant writ petition. By a speaking order this court has rejected this civil application on 11/12/2007. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on para 10 of the said order, which reads thus: “10. We feel it appropriate to give liberty to the applicant/petitioner to approach this court for appropriate orders, if steps are taken for filling up the post. We are informed that this writ petition was on the final hearing board. However, because this civil application was filed, it was removed from the board. We direct the office to add this writ petition to the final hearing board at appropriate place.” 3. The applicant has filed the present civil application praying that the respondents be restrained by an order of injunction from AJN 3 holding fresh election for the post of member from Ward No.12 of Zilla Parishad, Nashik. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the applicant. He submitted that in view of the fact that this court had granted the applicant liberty to approach this court if steps are taken for filling up the post, he has filed this civil application. He submitted that whether the applicant's caste certificate is rightly invalidated is an issue in this petition. He states that if the election is allowed to take place, irreparable harm will be caused to the applicant because the applicant has a good case on merits and the certificate was wrongly invalidated. He drew our attention to order dated 16/1/2008 passed by the Division Bench of this court (D.K. Deshmukh & V.M. Kanade, JJ.) in Writ Petition No.6187 of 2007. He pointed out that in similar fact situation, the Election Commission was directed not to hold fresh by-election in the seat which was subject matter of that petition until further orders. Learned counsel submitted that in the instant case also, similar order may be passed. AJN 4 5. It is not possible for us to accept this submission. The election programme is declared on 9/1/2008. The applicant claims that he has received the same on 10/1/2008. He has filed this civil application on 9/1/2008. However, the applicant did not circulate it immediately. This application was circulated on 14/1/2008 for 15/1/2008. We are informed by learned counsel for the State Election Commission that nomination forms are being accepted from today and actual election process has begun. Therefore, the facts of this case cannot be equated with the facts in Writ Petition No.6187 of 2007. 6. Our attention is also drawn to order dated 21/7/2008 passed by the Division Bench of this court in Writ Petition No.5581 of 2007 with Writ Petition No.39 of 2008. It was contended that in this matter, the Division Bench had earlier refused injunction. Though nomination of by-election had begun from 21/1/2008, it stayed the by-election later on by interim order. We have perused this order. In that case, a prima facie finding is recorded by this court that the AJN 5 Scrutiny Committee has not examined the case of the petitioner from the point of affinity test. The Division Bench, therefore, called for the record of the case and passed the interim order staying election. Facts of that case also cannot be equated with the facts of the present case. Hence, the prayer made by the applicant for stay is rejected. Civil application is disposed of. 6. All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. [SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J.] [SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J.]