1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4429 OF 2009 (Jogendra D. Sardare vs. The Divisional Commissioner & Ors.) 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. DECEMBER 08, 2009. Heard Shri Dongre, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Khubalkar, learned AGP for respondent No.1 and Shri Raut, learned counsel for respondent No. 2. The contention is that on the date of his election, Respondent No.2 was disqualified because property tax for the year 2005-06 and 2006-07 was not paid by him till then. The contention is, said amount has been paid after the result of the election. The perusal of order passed by the Commissioner upon the application of present petitioner shows that Respondent No.1, the Commissioner, has found that bill was not served upon the family member as required by the provisions of Section 129(3)(1)(b) of Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958. Because of this defect in service, the application has been rejected. Before me, Shri Dongre, learned counsel has tried to show that arrears were within the knowledge of Respondent No.2 and he did not clear those arrears till 2 he got elected. He further states that not only Respondent No.2 but his brothers were also in arrears and even for those arrears disqualification could have been ordered. However, he fairly states that such type of disqualification on account of brothers was not pleaded before Respondent No.1. He points out that when the records show that bills for the year 2005-06 and 2006-07 were issued, the presumption of their duly served ought to have been drawn. In view of the specific finding in the impugned order, it is apparent that such presumption cannot be drawn in these circumstances. I, therefore, do not find anything wrong with the conclusion reached by Respondent No.1. If the petitioner has got any other remedy in the matter, he is free to take recourse to it in accordance with law. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.