1 (WP 1700 of 2011) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1700 OF 2011 Shri Rajendra Sarjerao Patil ...Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents ----- Mr.Machhindra A. Patil for Petitioner Mr. P.S. Dani i/b. Mr. Anand Kulkarni for Respondent Nos.4 and 5 ----- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED: 24TH FEBRUARY, 2011 P.C. 1. Mentioned not on Board. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos.4 and 5 3. The grievance of the Petitioner is that his nomination papers which were filed for election of the Specified Society -Respondent No.3 was rejected by the Returning Officer only on the ground that the said 2 (WP 1700 of 2011) nomination form was not signed by the Seconder. In appeal also, the order of the Returning Officer was confirmed. It is submitted that if the signature of the Seconder has compared with the genuine signature, then it will be crystal clear that the Seconder had in fact, signed the nomination papers. 4. It is not possible to accept the submission made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner. The Returning Officer has recorded the statement of the Seconder and has also taken into consideration the affidavit filed by him in which he has categorically stated that he did not sign the nomination form. The Appeal Court also confirmed the order of the Returning Officer. This Court while exercising writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, cannot decide disputed question of facts. Hence, it will not be possible to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Returning Officer and confirmed in appeal. It is 3 (WP 1700 of 2011) always open for the Petitioner to challenge the result of the election by filing election petition. Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed and disposed of. (V.M. KANADE J.)