Rival challenges Ramdas Athavale8217;s election as MP

Athawale8217;s counsel Niteen Pradhan urged for dismissal of the petition at the interim stage on the ground that it was not maintainable and also because it raised irrelevant issues.

Petitioner8217;s counsel Srihari Ane and Ashutosh Kumbhkoni, however, argued that there was prima facie evidence to show that Athawale had breached constitutional provisions as well as election rules because of alleged wrong disclosures in his nomination-form about his birth-place and time which were relevant issues to determine his caste.

They submitted that Athawale had mentioned his birth-date as December 12, 1959 and birthplace as Majhlaon in Sangli district. Besides, he had mentioned that he belonged to the Mahar caste. However, inquiries with the tehsildar8217;s office revealed that in the records there was no mention about the birth of Athavale on that day in the same village.

Although Athawale claimed that he originally belonged to the Mahar caste, which fell under the scheduled caste category, he was a Buddhist since birth, they pleaded.

Thorat, who had won from the Pandharpur Lok Sabha seat five times in a row before tasting defeat at the hands of Athawale last year, contended that prior to 1990, certain castes in Hindu and Sikh religions got the benefit of scheduled caste status.

A constitutional amendment was introduced in 1990 to include Buddhists in the scheduled caste category from prospective effect. Only those who embraced Buddhism after 1990 were given the benefit of scheduled caste, the petitioner pleaded.

Athawale had claimed that he belonged to the Mahar caste which fell under the scheduled caste category. He has also indicated that he was born in 1959 when Ambedkar had embraced Buddhism in Nagpur alongwith his followers. Hence, Athawale could not claim the benefit of scheduled caste, he submitted.

It was further argued that Athawale had not shown that he embraced Buddhism after 1990. On the contrary, the petitioner said, Athawale was harping on his claim of being a member of scheduled caste community since 1959.

The petitioner argued that after Ambedkar had embraced Buddhism, the population of the scheduled castes had declined. This was reflected in the population of constituencies, reserved for scheduled castes. The number of such constituencies in Maharashtra had dwindled from six to three, he submitted.

Even in 1972, the Delimitation Committee had recommended increase in seats falling under the scheduled caste category on the basis of population. Although after 1990 constitution was amended to include Buddhists in the scheduled caste category, the number of reserved Lok Sabha seats in the state had not risen.

The petitioner challenged the 1990 amendment because the Maharashtra Governor and the National Commission of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe were not consulted.