1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 1498 OF 2010. Sudhakar Sitaram Dhondre -: versus :- The Assistant Registrar and others. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : MARCH 30, 2010. Heard Shri R.J. Kankale, learned counsel for petitioner and learned A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 and 2. Shri Kankale, learned counsel states that as petitioner is not much educated, in nomination form on declaration he put his signature only and did not fill in the blank space meant for declaring the number of children. The error was discovered in scrutiny and petitioner requested respondent no.2 to fill in the blank space, but that was not done. As nomination paper was rejected petitioner filed Appeal under Section 152A of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 and along with the appeal certificate issued by the Sarpanch to show number of children born to petitioner was also enclosed. Though petitioner has only two children, the Appellate Authority has not accepted that appeal and arbitrarily rejected it. He points out that as elections are scheduled on 04.04.2010, now the nomination form can be directed to be accepted. Learned A.G.P. on the other hand states that 2 incomplete nomination form was submitted and it is not the case of petitioner that in scrutiny he was not permitted to correct the error. He therefore supports the order of rejection. I have perused the papers along with the Writ Petition. The petitioner was aware of reason of rejection of his nomination paper and in his appeal memo he has not disclosed events which transpired on the date of scrutiny i.e. 09.03.2010. The certificate showing number of children is issued by the Sarpanch, and the same cannot be accepted as legal in writ jurisdiction. The rejection of nomination paper as incomplete by the Returning Officer and by Appellate Authority therefore cannot be interfered at this stage. Whether petitioner is illiterate or then he attempted to fill in the number of children on 09.03.2010 are disputed questions which cannot be gone into by this Court in writ jurisdiction. In view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court reported in the case of Kulwant Singh Parmar .vrs. Shere-e-Punjab Cooperative Housing Society (2007 [6] All M.R. 650), the cognizance of such questions cannot be taken in writ jurisdiction. Petitioner has got remedy of filing election petition after the elections are over. In view of that remedy, present Writ Petition is disposed of with no order as to cost. JUDGE Rgd.