{"id":142508,"date":"2009-11-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-11-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009"},"modified":"2015-08-07T00:28:11","modified_gmt":"2015-08-06T18:58:11","slug":"sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009","title":{"rendered":"Sau. Sujata Wife Of Deorao Ahir vs The Akola Municipal Corporation on 21 November, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court<\/div>\n
Sau. Sujata Wife Of Deorao Ahir vs The Akola Municipal Corporation on 21 November, 2009<\/div>\n
Bench: A. H. Joshi, A. R. Joshi<\/div>\n
                                 1\n\n\n\n\n                                                                 \n                                         \n             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY\n                       NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR\n\n\n\n\n                                        \n                   Writ Petition No.22 of 2009\n\n     Sau. Sujata wife of Deorao Ahir,\n     aged about 38 years,\n     occupation Corporator,\n\n\n\n\n                              \n     resident of Ward No.44, Krishinagar,\n     Akola, Tq. & Distt. Akola.         ....            Petitioner.\n                    ig        Versus\n\n     1.   The Akola Municipal Corporation,\n                  \n          Akola, through its Commissioner.\n\n     2.   The Divisional Commissioner,\n          Amravati Division,\n          Amravati.\n      \n\n\n     3.   Mahadeo son of Bhaiyyalal Bundele,\n   \n\n\n\n          aged about adult,\n          occupation Member of Akola\n          Municipal Corporation, Akola,\n          resident of Ward No.43,\n\n\n\n\n\n          Vrindavannagar, Akola,\n          Tq. & Distt. Akola.\n\n     4.   Bharip Bahujan Mahasangh,\n          Akola,\n          Distt. Unit, through\n\n\n\n\n\n          its Distt. President -\n          Shri Haridas Bhade,\n          resident of Dwarkanagari,\n          Jawahar Nagar,\n          Akola, Tq. & Distt.\n          Akola.\n\n     5.   Bharip Bahujan Mahasangh,\n          Municipal Party in Akola,\n\n\n\n\n                                         ::: Downloaded on - 09\/06\/2013 15:20:08 :::\n                                    2\n          Municipal Corporation through\n          its Leader Shri Sunil\n\n\n\n\n                                                                      \n          Tukaramji Meshram,\n          R\/o Ward No.14, Siddarthnagar,\n\n\n\n\n                                              \n          Akola, Tq. & Distt. Akola.     ....                Respondents.\n\n\n                               *****\n\n\n\n\n                                             \n     Mr. A.M. Gordey, Adv., for the petitioner.\n\n     Mr. Anup Dhore, Adv., for Respondent No.1.\n\n     Mr. M.A. Vaishnav, Adv., for respondent no.3 [absent].\n\n\n\n\n                              \n     Mr. G.G. Mishra, Adv., for respondent nos. 4 and 5\n     [absent].        ig       *****\n                    \n                                  CORAM   :     A.H. JOSHI AND\n                                                A.R. JOSHI, JJ.\n<\/pre>\n
                                  Date    :      21st November,2009.\n<\/p>\n
     ORAL JUDGMENT [Per A.H. Joshi, J]:\n<\/p>\n
     1.       Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard<\/p>\n
     finally by consent.\n<\/p>\n
     2.       Facts can be briefly described as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
               [a]   Petitioner is one amongst the group
\n                     of     Councilors            belonging               to
\n                     respondent no.5, who is a section of
\n                     Respondent    no.4            Bharip        Bahujan
\n                     Mahasangh, Akola.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                              ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:20:08 :::<\/span>
\n                                  3<\/span><\/p>\n
          [b]    Admittedly, the respondent no.3 is
\n                 the    Group    Leader      of     the     Political<\/p>\n
                 Party    in    Corporation                respondent
\n                 no.5.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          [c]    It is seen that the Party Leader of
\n                 the    Respondent      No.4           a    political
\n                 party – directed the respondent no.3<\/p>\n
                 by letter dated 25th February, 2008
\n                 [Annex.IV],           to          nominate           the<\/p>\n
                 petitioner as a Member of Standing
\n                 Committee.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          [d]    This letter [Annex.IV] is regarded
\n                 by the petitioner to be a whip as
\n                 noted therein.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          [e]    Respondent      No.3,       who      is     a     Group
\n                 Leader,       has    nominated         himself         by
\n                 letter        dated        26th      Feb.,          2008<\/p>\n
                 [Annex.V]       in     disregard           of       whip
\n                 [Annex.IV].\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          [f]    Based on the nomination done through<\/p>\n
                 Annexure-V, the respondent no.3 has
\n                 been     nominated         on      the      Standing
\n                 Committee by the respondent nos. 1
\n                 and 2.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     3.   The petitioner has challenged Annexure-V                         own<\/p>\n
                                            ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:20:08 :::<\/span>
\n                                         4<\/span>
\n     nomination by Respondent No.3 in this petition and as a<\/p>\n
     result,     has   prayed    for   the   relief,     which       reads       as<\/p>\n
     follows:-\n<\/p>\n
                 (a) by an appropriate writ, order and\/or
\n                     direction, direct the respondent no.
\n                     1-Akola    Municipal     Corporation,<\/p>\n
                     Akola, and the respondent no.2-
\n                     Divisional   Commissioner,   Amravati
\n                     Division, Amravati, to delete the
\n                     name of the respondent no.3 as a
\n                     Member of the Standing Committee of<\/p>\n
                     the   respondent    no.1        Akola
\n                     Municipal Corporation, Akola, and<\/p>\n
                     accept the name of the petitioner as
\n                     a Member of the Standing Committee
\n                     of   the   respondent   no.1-   Akola
\n                     Municipal Corporation, Akola, in<\/p>\n
                     pursuance of the communication dtd.
\n                     26\/2\/2008 (Annexure-VIII).\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     [Quoted from page 20 of the Writ Petition paper-book].\n<\/p>\n
     4.          Foundation      of    the    prayer       is       based        on<\/p>\n
     petitioner s construction of Sub-section (2) of Section<\/p>\n
     31A    of   the   Bombay    Provincial   Municipal         Corporations<\/p>\n
     Act,    1949.     Section   31A   is    quoted    below        for     ready<\/p>\n
     reference as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
                  31A   Appointment    by    nomination   on
\n                 Committees   to    be    by    proportional
\n                 representation –\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                 (1)    Notwithstanding anything contained
\n                 in this Act or the rules or bye-laws made
\n                 thereunder, in the case of the following
\n                 Committees, except where it is provided
\n                 by this Act, that the appointment of a<\/p>\n
                                                ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:20:08 :::<\/span>
\n                                  5<\/span>
\n             Councillor to any Committee shall be by
\n             virtue   of   his    holding   any    office,<\/p>\n
             appointment    of   Councillors    to   these
\n             Committees, whether in regular or casual<\/p>\n
             vacancies,    shall    be    made    by   the
\n             Corporation by nominating Councillors in
\n             accordance with the provisions of sub-
\n             section (2):-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             (a)    Standing Committee;\n\n             (b)    Transport Committee;\n\n             (c)    Any special      Committee       appointed\n\n\n\n\n                               \n             under section 30;\n\n             (d)   \n                    Any ad hoc\n             under section 31.\n                                     Committee       appointed\n\n\n             (2)    In nominating the Councillors on\n                  \n<\/pre>\n
             the Committee, the Corporation shall take
\n             into account the relative strength of the
\n             recognised parties or registered parties
\n             or groups and nominate members, as nearly
\n             as may be, in proportion to the strength<\/p>\n
             of   such  parties   or  groups   in  the
\n             Corporation, after consulting the Leader<\/p>\n
             of the House, the Leader of Opposition
\n             and the leader of each such party or
\n             group;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                    Provided…………\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                    Provided further……………\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             (3)    If any   question arises as regards
\n             the number of   Councillors to be nominated
\n             on behalf of     such party or group, the<\/p>\n
             decision of     the Corporation shall be
\n             final.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     [Note : Provisos to Sub-Section (2) are not quoted,
\n             as those are not relevant.]<\/p>\n
     5.     Petitioner s     construction   of     Sub-clause            (2)<\/p>\n
                                         ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:20:08 :::<\/span>
\n                                      6<\/span>
\n     quoted above, is that said Section              lays down that the<\/p>\n
     Councillors, who are members of a party or a group,<\/p>\n
     will have to elect or nominate in accordance with the<\/p>\n
     whip.\n<\/p>\n
     6.      Learned      Advocate       for    the      petitioner             has<\/p>\n
     further argued that:-\n<\/p>\n
             [a]   The whip given by the party to the
\n                   Respondent No.3 was, in fact, given<\/p>\n
                   to all members of the respondent no.4.
\n                   In the result, had the respondent no.4<\/p>\n
                   observed democratic process and would
\n                   have    called     the      meeting,       the     party
\n                   whip was bound to be obeyed and the<\/p>\n
                   respondent no.3 was under obligation
\n                   to nominate the petitioner.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             [b]   Had     the     democratic          process          been
\n                   followed by the respondent no.3, he<\/p>\n
                   would    have     been      devoid     of     personal
\n                   power     and     authority          to       nominate
\n                   himself as a candidate other than one
\n                   who may be elected in accordance with<\/p>\n
                   the whip, i.e., the petitioner.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     7.      Learned Adv., for the petitioner has placed<\/p>\n
     reliance on following reported judgments to support his<\/p>\n
                                                ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:20:08 :::<\/span>
\n                                          7<\/span>
\n     contention:-\n<\/p>\n
     [a]     Dattabhau    son       of       Annasaheb          Pathrikar           Vs.
\n             State of Mah. [2007 (3) Mh.L.J. 76], and<\/p>\n
     [b]     Narendra     Gota      Pardesi            Vs.       Mayor,         Dhule
\n             Municipal Corporation, Dule & ors. [2007 (6)
\n             Mh.L.J. 216].\n<\/p>\n
     8.      Perusal     of    Judgments           discloses            that        these<\/p>\n
     cases arose out of the matter of election of the Leader<\/p>\n
     of Opposition.   ig As per the law applicable, it was a<\/p>\n
     case of numerical counting, and does not govern the<\/p>\n
     situation as emerging in present case.\n<\/p>\n
     9.      The     language       used          in       Section            31A      (2)<\/p>\n
     authorises     nomination of Councillor on the Committee<\/p>\n
     in following two stages:-\n<\/p>\n
              First –         ascertaining               proportion               or<\/p>\n
                              number         of        members           to       be
\n                              nominated,           based              on        the
\n                              strength of each registered or
\n                              recognised party or group.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             Second –          consulting          Leader          of      House,
\n                              the   Leader        of       Opposition           and
\n                              the Leader of each such party
\n                              or    group          to        nominate           the
\n                              councillors                 on            Standing<\/p>\n
                                                       ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:20:08 :::<\/span>
\n                                       8<\/span>
\n                           Committee.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     10.      The term     each such party or group                   seen in<\/p>\n
     first stage indicated in the foregoing para shall have<\/p>\n
     to be construed to be the rule directing the procedure<\/p>\n
     for ascertaining number of nominations available per<\/p>\n
     party or group.     This is certainly a numerical job.\n<\/p>\n
     11.
\n              Second stage in paragraph no.9 relates to the<\/p>\n
     process of actual nomination.\n<\/p>\n
     12.      What is seen contemplated for second stage in<\/p>\n
     Section 31A (2) is the consultation as contemplated<\/p>\n
     therein which reads as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
               after consulting the Leader of the House,
\n              the Leader of Opposition and the leader of
\n              each such party or group.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
              This process of consultation, thus, lays down<\/p>\n
     that the nomination is upon indication of a name to be<\/p>\n
     a member of the Committee nominated\/assented by the<\/p>\n
     Leader   of the     group   or   party    concerned.\n<\/p>\n
     13.      It is seen from what has emerged from analysis<\/p>\n
     of first stage is that the consultation with Leader of<\/p>\n
                                              ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:20:08 :::<\/span>
\n                                             9<\/span>
\n     House and Leader of Opposition is bare consultative,<\/p>\n
     and directory in nature. It is not decisive of name of<\/p>\n
     the person to be nominated\/deleted.\n<\/p>\n
     14.          What is seen decisive is consultation with the<\/p>\n
     Leader of a political party or of the group who has<\/p>\n
     power to nominate.\n<\/p>\n
     15.
\n                  Reading of the Sub-section (2) of Section 33A<\/p>\n
     of the said Act does not disclose that it lays down a<\/p>\n
     scheme of nomination to be decided on number of members<\/p>\n
     of group or party. The narration stops at consultation,<\/p>\n
     and   that     too    with       leader    only    and     not     with       the<\/p>\n
      members of the          party    or   group .\n<\/p>\n
                  Had   the   terminology       employed      in     Sub-section<\/p>\n
     (2)of Section 31A aforesaid been                 Party or Group             only<\/p>\n
     than the group of words                Leader of party or group ,<\/p>\n
     in    that    case,      even    in    absence    of     description           of<\/p>\n
     elective process, the member to be nominated was liable<\/p>\n
     to be elected by democratic process, as consultation<\/p>\n
     was bound to be with members, which may have meant<\/p>\n
     voting. However, elective process is neither expressed<\/p>\n
     or implied.\n<\/p>\n
                                                   ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:20:08 :::<\/span>
\n                                         10<\/span><\/p>\n
     16.       It is seen that petitioner has impleaded the<\/p>\n
     respondent nos. 4 and 5, however, it appears that the<\/p>\n
     person or persons in the harness of the party do not<\/p>\n
     favour the factual matter and legal propositions on<\/p>\n
     which    the   petitioner    has     a    very    strong       thrust        and<\/p>\n
     faith.\n<\/p>\n
     17.       In
\n                    the   present   case,       admittedly,<\/p>\n
     no.3 is a leader. He has preferred to nominate himself.\n<\/p>\n
                                                                     respondent<\/p>\n
     Petitioner did not array other councillors from her<\/p>\n
     group as respondents, which may have at least indicated<\/p>\n
     that whether the democracy in her party is on the side<\/p>\n
     of the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
     18.       It is, thus, clear that scheme of the Act does<\/p>\n
     not provide for democratic elective process.                         What is<\/p>\n
     not   expressed      in   statute,       cannot    be     infused        by     a<\/p>\n
     judicial act.\n<\/p>\n
     19.       Petitioner s claim is, therefore, without any<\/p>\n
     foundation of a right in the statute, has no merit, and<\/p>\n
     is rejected.\n<\/p>\n
                                                  ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 15:20:08 :::<\/span>
\n                                    11<\/span><\/p>\n
     20.       Rule    is   discharged.     In      the      circumstances,<\/p>\n
     parties shall bear own costs.\n<\/p>\n
               JUDGE                                          JUDGE\n\n\n\n\n                                                \n                                -0-0-0-0-\n\n     |hedau|\n\n\n\n\n                                 \n                       \n                      \n      \n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                 ::: Downloaded on - 09\/06\/2013 15:20:08 :::<\/span>\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court Sau. Sujata Wife Of Deorao Ahir vs The Akola Municipal Corporation on 21 November, 2009 Bench: A. H. Joshi, A. R. Joshi 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Writ Petition No.22 of 2009 Sau. Sujata wife of Deorao Ahir, aged about 38 years, occupation Corporator, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[11,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-142508","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bombay-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSau. Sujata Wife Of Deorao Ahir vs The Akola Municipal Corporation on 21 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sau. Sujata Wife Of Deorao Ahir vs The Akola Municipal Corporation on 21 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-11-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-08-06T18:58:11+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sau. Sujata Wife Of Deorao Ahir vs The Akola Municipal Corporation on 21 November, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-06T18:58:11+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1348,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Bombay High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009\",\"name\":\"Sau. Sujata Wife Of Deorao Ahir vs The Akola Municipal Corporation on 21 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-06T18:58:11+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sau. Sujata Wife Of Deorao Ahir vs The Akola Municipal Corporation on 21 November, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Sau. Sujata Wife Of Deorao Ahir vs The Akola Municipal Corporation on 21 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sau. Sujata Wife Of Deorao Ahir vs The Akola Municipal Corporation on 21 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-11-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-08-06T18:58:11+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sau. Sujata Wife Of Deorao Ahir vs The Akola Municipal Corporation on 21 November, 2009","datePublished":"2009-11-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-06T18:58:11+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009"},"wordCount":1348,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Bombay High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009","name":"Sau. Sujata Wife Of Deorao Ahir vs The Akola Municipal Corporation on 21 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-11-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-06T18:58:11+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sau-sujata-wife-of-deorao-ahir-vs-the-akola-municipal-corporation-on-21-november-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sau. Sujata Wife Of Deorao Ahir vs The Akola Municipal Corporation on 21 November, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/142508","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=142508"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/142508\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=142508"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=142508"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=142508"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}