1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2081 OF 2010 Shri Ratnakar s/o Sundarrao Bhosale .. PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. A.K. Tikle, Advocate holding for Mr. V.D. Salunke, Advocate for the petitioner. Mrs. Y.M. Kshirsagar, AGP for respondent no. 1. Mr. S.S. Thombre, Advocate for respondent no. 3. ===== CORAM : R. M. BORDE, J. DATE : 19th MARCH, 2010 PER COURT : 1 Admittedly the petitioner had cleared off the dues after the last date of presentation of nomination paper. It is contended by the petitioner that he presented 'no dues' certificate at 4'O clock before the Returning Officer on the date prescribed for scrutiny of nomination paper. It is also contended by the petitioner that he had sought adjournment till the next day for producing 'no dues' certificate from the concerned society. However, the Returning Officer did not exercise his powers under section 56(R)(5) and put 2 up the matter for scrutiny on the same date. However, it is not necessary to go into the question for the reason that admittedly the dues are not cleared off until the last date of presentation of nomination paper. The question that arises as to whether the candidate can insist upon acceptance of his nomination paper who is admittedly a defaulter on the last date of presentation of the nomination papers and has cleared off the dues on the date prescribed for scrutiny of nomination paper. The controversy has been set at rest in view of the various decisions. Reference can be made to the decision rendered by this court in the matter of Navnath s/o Motiram Shirale vs. The Returning Officer reported in 2005(4) All MR 318. This court while considering the matter has also dealt with the issue and placing reliance on the judgment in the matter of Vijaysingh Kishanrao Parbat vs. Returning Officer, Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd., reported in 2003(2) All MR 523 the court has adopted a view that the candidate insisting for acceptance of his nomination paper shall not be a defaulter on the last date of presentation of nomination paper. In the instant case, admittedly, the petitioner was defaulter on the last date of presentation of nomination paper and he has cleared off the dues on the next day. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nomination paper of the petitioner was not liable to be accepted and the Returning Officer was justified in rejecting the 3 same. There is no merit in the petition. Petition therefore stands rejected summarily. 2 In view of dismissal of petition, pending civil application, if any, stands disposed of. ( R. M. BORDE, J.) dyb/office/wp2081.10.odt