Civic polls: Relief to BJP nominee as HC grants interim stay on election in Navi Mumbai ward

The Bombay High Court on Thursday granted an interim stay on the upcoming election in ward 17A (Vashi) of the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation and also the order of a returning officer rejecting a BJP candidate's nomination. BJP leader Nilesh Bhojane's nomination form was rejected by the returning officer under section 10(1D) of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act on the grounds that there was unauthorised construction on his property.

A bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad said the election returning officer has "prima facie demonstrated illegal and arbitrary exercise of powers" by rejecting Bhojane's nomination form.

In its interim order, the court stayed the returning officer's decision to reject Bhojane's nomination form for the January 15 election in ward 17A of the Navi Mumbai civic body.

"The State Election Commission, the Commissioner, Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation, the Chief Electoral Officer and the Election Returning Officer, Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation shall not proceed further as regards the election on the seat of Councillor for Ward No. 17A of the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation," HC said.

The court will hear the matter further on Friday.

Bhojane had challenged the December 31, 2025, order of the returning officer holding his nomination invalid.

As per section 10(1D) of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act, a person shall be disqualified for being a councillor if he or she, or a dependent family member, has constructed any illegal or unauthorised structure.

In his plea, Bhojane said that this section applies to only a sitting councillor and not a candidate.

The bench in its order said impeding or stalling the election process was one thing, while interference in a few constituencies or wards was another thing.

"We are of the prima facie opinion that there is no absolute bar to entertain a petition in matters like the present one, which prima facie demonstrate illegal and arbitrary exercise of powers by the Election Returning Officer," HC said.

The court said the petitioner was required to be given interim relief as section 10(1D) was not applicable in his case.

(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)