Summary: The High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad dealt with multiple petitions challenging the drawing of boundaries for electoral wards in Maharashtra. The court emphasized that it has limited power to get involved in these matters, as guided by constitutional rules and past Supreme Court decisions.
In several legal requests, different people challenged the final notice about how the wards were set up in Maharashtra. These challenges came up because of the upcoming local elections. The main issue was whether certain villages should be included or left out of the voting areas.
The court, led by Judges Manish Pitale and Y.G. Khobragade, referred to constitutional rules like 243-O and 329(a), which limit how much courts can get involved in election issues. They pointed to past Supreme Court decisions that said courts should only step in if there is a clear violation of constitutional rules.
"The courts cannot interfere... so long as the panchayat areas and the constituencies are delimited in conformity with the constitutional provisions." — Supreme Court
Abhijeet Deshmukh's Petition: Abhijeet Deshmukh challenged the ward setup in Hingoli district, saying that his complaints were unfairly ignored. The court found that the right steps were followed, including hearings and detailed reviews by officials.
Nanded and Ahilyanagar Disputes: Several requests from these districts claimed that changes in voting boundaries were done for political reasons. The court looked at maps and documents and concluded that the changes followed the rules and were not random.
The court rejected all the requests, stressing the importance of sticking to the election timeline as directed by the Supreme Court. They noted that any interference could mess up the election process, which has already been delayed.
This case highlights the tricky nature of election processes and the careful way the judiciary handles them.
