SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1992 Supreme(Bom) 59

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
A.V. Savant, J.
Someshwar Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Limited
through its authorised representative .... Petitioner.
Versus
Shrinivas Patil and others.... Respondents
Writ Petition No. 56 of 1992, decided on 31-1-92 and 3-2-92.
Advocates appeared :
K.K. Singhvi with Y.S. Jahajirdar, for the petitioners.
B.R. Naik with Prashant Naik, for respondents Nos . 2 to 4.
C.J. Sawant with U.G. Kerkar, A.G.P., for respondent Nos. 1, 5 6.

Headnote:Sections 144-T & 144-X-Maharashtra Specified Co-operative Societies Elections to Committee Rules, 1971-Rules 4, 5,6,7,8 and 9-Constitution of India-Article 226- Election process- Preparation of voters list-Writ jurisdiction-Interference by the High Court-Alternative remedy.

       Preparation of voters list in accordance with provisions of 1960 Act & 1971 Rules is just an intermediate stage in process of election. Not proper for High Court to interfere at intermediate stage after process of election has commenced even if grievance is justified. Better to leave parties to raise necessary dispute by way of substantive election petition after the election.

       MAHARASHTRA SPECIFIED CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ELECTIONS TO COMMITTEE RULES, 1971

       Rules 4, 5,6,7,8, and 9.

       See Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1961, Sections 144-T and 144-X.

JUDGMENT - A.V. SAVANT, J.:---This petition raises two questions of law in view of the preliminary objection raised on behalf of the respondents as to the maintainability of this petition and it has, therefore, become necessary to deal with the said two questions at the admission stage itself. The said two questions of law are:-

(i) Whether the preparation of the list of voters for elections to the Managing Committee of a specified Society in accordance with the provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 and the Maharashtra Specified Co-operative Societies Elections to Committees Rules, 1971 is an intermediate stage in the process of election; and

(ii) if the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, whether this Court should interfere in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and hold up the election process or whether it should leave the parties to raise the necessary dispute by way of a substantive election petition as provided for under section 144-T of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960.

In my view, the first question is no longer res integra and is concluded by the two Division Bench decisions directly on the point taking the view that the preparation of the voters list in accordance with the provisions of the said 1960 Act and 1971 Rules is just an intermediate stage in the process of election. As far as the second question is concerned, the same is also concluded by some decisions of the Supreme Court holding that though the High Court is not powerless under Article 226 of the Constitution, there is a remedy by way of a substantive election petition provided under the special statute, it would not be proper for the High Court to interfere at the intermediate stage after the process of election has commenced. Since, however, the matter has been argued at some length, a few facts may be stated as under.

2. The petitioner Society viz., Shri Someshwar Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., is a specified Society within the meaning of the provisions of section 73-G of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (for short, the "said Act"). It was registered in 1960. It has around 6500 producer-members and about 45 society members. The Managing Committee of the petitioner Society consists of 21 members elected in accordance with its Bye-laws. The last election to the Managing Committee of the petitioner Society was held in December 1986 and the tenure of office being 5 years, the terms has expired in December 1991. There is no controversy that the election had to be held around December, 1991 so that the new Committee could take over as early as possible. There is also no controversy before me that for holding such an election the persons who are enrolled as members as on 30th June, 1991 would be eligible to participate in the said election. It appears that on the 18th May, 1991 the present Managing Committee enrolled as many as 394 members. On the 6th June, 1991 a dispute has been filed under section of the said Act challenging the said Resolution dated 18th May, 1991. The relief prayed for in the said dispute was that certain persons were illegally enrolled as members of the petitioner society in the meeting held on 18th May, 1991. On the 29th June, 1991 the Managing Committee further enrolled 678 members. In the dispute pending under section 91, on the 25th July, 1991, the Co-operative Court directed the petitioner Society to produce certain documents relating to the enrollment of new members. In a Revision Application filed by the petitioner Society, the Co-operative Appellate Court modified the said order on 30th July, 1991 regarding production of some of the documents.

3. In the meanwhile, some of the members of the petitioner society filed Writ Petition No. 3692 of 1991. This Court passed an order directing the Collector to start the election process forthwith. The exact order passed by the Division Bench of Kurdukar Sindhakar., JJ, on 26th August, 1991 is as

















































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top