1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6483 OF 2010 Smt.Rekha w/o Subhash Thanange and others ..Petitioners Versus The State of Maharashtra and ors. ..Respondents Mr.V.D.Hon, Advocate for petitioners Mrs.A.V.Gondhalekar, A.G.P. for respondent No.1 Mr.S.T.Shelke, Advocate for respondents 2 to 4 CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND N.D.DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 28th July 2010 PER COURT : 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioner, who objects to the formation of the ward for the forthcoming elections of Grampanchayat, Tikhol, Taluka Parner, District Ahmednagar. 2. The challenge in this petition is multi fold as the petitioner contends that the draft notification was not published by beat of drums and that the ward formation is incorrect as the number of voters is disproportionately large in one ward while in the other ward it is extremely low. It is also stated that there is a total violation of the rules in respect of the formation of the wards. 2 3. The learned Counsel for respondents have pointed out that the formation of the wards has been done in accordance with rules. It is also urged before us that total seven members are to be elected from this Grampanchayat. Accordingly, in Ward No.1, where two seats have been made available, the number of population of that Ward is 385. In Ward No.2, three seats have been allotted and the population of that ward is 611 while in Ward No.3, two seats have been allotted and the population of that ward is 397. Since seven seats are to be elected and two seats each have been allotted to Ward Nos.1 and 3 and three seats to Ward No.2, the number of voters in Ward No.2 is bound to be more as the said ward elects three candidates. It is also pointed out to us that the document which is annexed by the petitioners itself shows that the notification was published by beat of drums. It is further stated that petitioner No.1 who was the Ex-Sarpanch was also present in the meeting convened for the purposes of formation of the wards. 4. With the assistance of the learned Counsel for the parties, we have perused the documents and we do not find that any case for interference is made out and consequently, this petition which is sans merit is summarily dismissed with no orders as to costs. ( N.D.DESHPANDE, J.) ( P.V.HARDAS, J.) (vvr/6483.10wp)