2306wp2807.11.odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.2807 OF 2011 Sau.Anusaya Laxman Meshram and ors. ..vs.. State of Maharashtra and ors. WRIT PETITION NO.2900 OF 2011 Shri Arjun Zamji Shedmake ..vs.. State of Maharashtra and ors. WRIT PETITION NO.2901 OF 2011 Sau.Surekha Govind Tekam ..vs.. State of Maharashtra and ors. WRIT PETITION NO.2902 OF 2011 Sau.Anusaya Laxman Meshram ..vs.. State of Maharashtra and ors. WRIT PETITION NO.2903 OF 2011 Sau.Aruna Bharat Ghodam ..vs.. State of Maharashtra and ors. ............................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ............................................................................................................................................................... Mr. R.L.Khapre, Adv. for the petitioners. Mr.A.M.Ghare, Advocate for caveator. Mr.A.D.Sonak, A.G.P.for resp.nos.1,3 and 4. CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J. DATED : 23rd June, 2011. 2306wp2807.11.odt 2 The above petitions filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India take exception to the rejection of the nomination form of each of the above petitioners in all the above petitions on the ground that the declaration and undertaking has not been furnished in proper time. The nomination form of the petitioner in each of the above petitions discloses that the declaration is blank and therefore without any particulars. Insofar as the undertaking is concerned, the same is only signed, which signature is purported to be of each of the petitioners. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in view of the fact that the facsimile of the form has been filled up by the petitioner, and since the particulars are there, same have to be read in the declaration as well as the undertaking, and therefore, if so read, the fact that the declaration form and the undertaking are blank would not amount to a substantial defect in the nomination, in my view, it is not possible to accept the said contention at this stage. However, it would be open for the petitioner in each of the above petitions to file appropriate proceedings as would be permissible in law after the elections are filed. If such proceedings are filed, needless to say that the observations in the instant order would not come in the way of the petitioners in prosecuting the said remedy, which would be tried on its own merits and in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petitions are dismissed. JUDGE chute 2306wp2807.11.odt 3