IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.3465 of 2009 Mukhtar Jafar Sab Qureshi ] R/o Safangar, Ausa, Tq. Ausa, ] PETITIONER. District Latur. ] VERSUS 1 The State of Maharashtra ] Through the Secretary, Urban ] RESPONDENTS. Development Deptt., Mantralaya, ] Mumbai, and others. ] ----- Mr. V. D. Hon, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. U. K. Patil, AGP, for respondents. ----- Coram : Naresh H. Patil and N. D. Deshpande, JJ. Date : 12th June, 2009. ORAL ORDER : [ Per – Naresh H. Patil, J. ] Heard. 2 The learned counsel Shri.V.D.Hon appearing on behalf of petitioner submitted that the amended provisions of section 51-1B of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 (for short the Act of 1965”) are unreasonable, illegal and unconstitutional on the ground that the Caste Scrutiny Committees are not in a position to verify the caste claims and issue caste validity certificates within the stipulated time frame. The amendment is not applicable to the election of a Municipal Councillor but is applicable to the election of a President of a Municipal Council. The amendment would go contrary to the letter and spirit of the judgment delivered by Division Bench of Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No.5691 of 2007. - 2 - 3 The learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that in this case the petitioner was elected as a Municipal Councillor from the open category in the year 2006 and now in the year 2009 he was desirous of contesting the election to the post of President of Municipal Council. It was possible for the petitioner to get the caste claim verified from the Scrutiny Committee, as he belongs to Other Backward Class category, since the year 2006. At the fag end, the petitioner is raising the plea that petitioner’s caste verification claim is pending with the Scrutiny Committee and, therefore, he shall be permitted to file nomination form for election to the office of President of Municipal Council. 4 We have considered the amended provisions of Section 51-1B of the Act of 1965, which are amended by the Maharashtra Act No.VII of 2009 with effect from 14th January, 2009. In the light of the subsisting amendment and the facts of the case, we find that the petitioner would not be entitled to file nomination for contesting the election to the seat of President as a candidate belonging to Other Backward Class. 5 At this stage, in exercise of extra ordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, no interference is warranted. Petition deserves to be dismissed. 6 It is clarified that we have not touched the issue of validity of provisions of Section 51-1B of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965. Those issues are kept open. 7 Petition stands dismissed. [ N. D. Deshpande, J. ] [ Naresh H. Patil, J. ] pcr/wp3465.09