In a significant development for the ongoing civic body elections in Maharashtra, the Bombay High Court on Thursday intervened to put the election process on hold for a specific ward in Navi Mumbai. The court order came as a relief to a Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) candidate whose nomination form was rejected earlier.
Court Halts Election Process in Ward 17A
The High Court bench, comprising Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad, issued a stay on the polling process for Ward 17A in the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (NMMC). This interim order was passed while hearing a writ petition filed by BJP candidate Nilesh Bhojane, who legally challenged the rejection of his nomination form on December 31.
The rejection had stemmed from a complaint filed by a rival Shiv Sena candidate. The Returning Officer (RO) had disqualified Bhojane citing a notice issued by the NMMC on February 24, 2025. This notice pertained to the "alleged unauthorised commercial use" of his house in Navi Mumbai.
Legal Arguments and Prima Facie Observations
During the hearing, the High Court expressed a prima facie view that the case demonstrated an "illegal and arbitrary exercise of powers" by the Returning Officer. The bench explicitly stated that there is no absolute constitutional bar against entertaining a writ petition in such matters.
Representing Bhojane, senior counsel Navroz Seervai, along with advocates Mayur Khandeparkar and Nivit Srivastava, presented a key argument. They contended that the provision of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations (MMC) Act invoked to disqualify Bhojane applies specifically to a "sitting councillor" and not to a candidate merely seeking to contest an election. Seervai cited several judicial judgments to support this interpretation.
The petition argued that Section 10(1D) of the MMC Act, which governs disqualification for being a councillor involved in illegal construction or obstruction, was wholly inapplicable. Bhojane's case stated that no illegal activity was conducted, as professional practice by oneself is permissible under the state's Unified Development Control and Promotion Regulations, even in a residential zone.
Grounds of Challenge and Next Hearing
Bhojane's petition labeled the rejection as being on "flimsy grounds" and declared it "anathema to democracy." It further alleged that a popular candidate likely to win was being prevented from contesting on grounds devoid of merit. The petitioner also claimed he was not shown any material evidence that the NMMC relied upon to exclude him from the electoral race.
Opposing the petition, senior counsel A Y Sakhare, representing the complainant candidate Patkar, argued that the writ petition was not maintainable. Sachin Shetye, counsel for the State Election Commission, supported the RO's decision, stating Bhojane could not be included in the final list of validly nominated candidates.
Granting urgent interim relief to the BJP candidate, the High Court has posted the matter for final disposal on January 9 (Friday). The stay order effectively freezes all election-related activities for Ward 17A of the NMMC until the court delivers its final verdict on the legality of the nomination rejection.
