Bombay High Court
GAURI GANESH NANAWAREversusTHE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION THROUGH CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- RAVINDRA V GHUGE
Holding
The writ petition was disposed of as withdrawn on instructions, without adjudicating the merits.
Summary
Gauri Ganesh Nanaware filed a writ petition challenging the rejection of his nomination as a candidate of a national political party, alleging that the returning officer declined the nomination because a whitener had been used to obscure a previously typed name on Annexure‑2 and a new name was written over it. The petitioner’s counsel submitted a communication from an authorized representative of Shiv Sena confirming that the altered names were the party’s official candidates. The corporation’s counsel noted the communication but made no objection. Subsequently, the petitioner’s counsel informed the court that the petition was being withdrawn on instructions. The court therefore disposed of the writ petition as withdrawn, without addressing the substantive issues.
Issues considered
- What is the legal effect of a communication from an authorized party representative confirming altered candidate names on the validity of a nomination?
- Whether the returning officer’s rejection of a nomination on the ground of name alteration with whitener is permissible under election law.
Subjects
- writ petition
- nomination rejection
- election law
- withdrawal of petition
- political party candidate
- State Election Commission
- Shiv Sena
Judgment
TRUPTI
SADANAND
BAMNE
Digitally signed
by TRUPTI
SADANAND
BAMNE 3-wp-24-2026.odt
Date: 2026.01.03
14:56:26 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 24 OF 2026
Gauri Ganesh Nanaware … Petitioner
versus
The State Election Commission & Ors. … Respondents
Mr.Nitin Gaware Patil with Mr.Omkar Chavan i/b. Mr.Z.H.Farooqui
for the Petitioner.
Mr.S.B.Shetye for the Respondent-State Election Commission.
Mr.V.S.Bedre for the Respondent – Ahilyanagar Municipal
Corporation.
----
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.
(VACATION COURT)
DATE : 3rd JANUARY, 2026
P.C. :-
1. The reason for declining the acceptance of the
nomination form as an official candidate of a National Political
Party, is on account of whitener being applied on a name earlier
typed on Annexure -2 and the name of the Petitioner being written
below the portion which is camouflaged by applying a whitener.
Trupti 1 of 3
3-wp-24-2026.odt
2. The learned Advocate for the Petitioner has pointed out
a specific communication issued by an Authorized Representative of
the Political Party addressed to the Election Returning Officer. The
said communication records that in seven cases, the originally typed
names of candidates were camouflaged using whitener and fresh
names were thereafter inserted. The authorized person, claiming
authority from the political party Shiv Sena (symbol: bow and
arrow), has addressed the Commissioner confirming the names
which were subsequently written, as being the official candidates of
that Political Party.
3. The learned Advocate for the Corporation submits, on
instructions, that the Corporation may consider the said case in the
light of the communication received from the authorized signatory
of Shivsena (symbol: “bow and arrow”), during the course of the
day.
4. In view of the above, the learned Advocate for the
Petitioner submits, on instructions, that the Petition can be disposed
off, as withdrawn on instructions.
Trupti 2 of 3
3-wp-24-2026.odt
5. As such, this Writ Petition is disposed off, as
withdrawn on instructions.
(RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)
(VACATION COURT)
Trupti 3 of 3
Checking your session…