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

1999 Supreme(Bom) 675

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
(NAGPUR BENCH)
J.N. Patel, J.
Sudhakar s/o Gangaram Bahale..... Petitioner.
Versus
Madhukar s/o Ramrao Bhuibhar others..... Respondents.
Writ Petition No. 3277 of 1998 , decided on 6-9-1999.
Advocates appeared :
C.G. Madkholkar, for the petitioner.
A.S. Bobde, Sr.C. with Smt. S.W. Deshpande, for respondent No. 1.
S.J. Chawda, A.G.P., for respondents 3 to 5.

Headnote:Section 73-G-Maharashtra Specified Co-operative Societies Elections to Committee Rules, 1971, Rule 52(2)(a)-Election-Managing Committee of Society-Two voters carried identical rubber stamps for marking ballot papers-While authorised instrument available-Pre-arrangement and not a coincidence-Examination of ballot papers-Unauthorised markings by rubber stamp reveals identity of voters-Such marking cannot be ignored-Order invalidating two votes cast in favour of elected candidate justified.-Examination of ballot paper Nos. 17 and 18 reveals that the two voters, who had cast their votes in the election, have carried with them identical umber stamps for marking the ballot papers, in addition to the authorised instrument, which speaks of a pre-arrangement and not a coincidence. The two ballot papers in question reveal that the votes have been given in favour of the petitioner. The unauthorised markings on the said ballot papers are made in the column of the candidates in whose favour they did not cast their votes. To my mind, this unauthorised marks by a rubber stamp, which are identical in nature in the two ballot papers in question, are sufficient to reveal the identity of the voters and they are not merely innocuous markings on the ballot papers which could have been ignored. Therefore, the impugned order invalidating the two votes cast in favour of the petitioner was justified in the facts and circumstances of the case.

JUDGMENT - J.N. PATEL, J.:---(Note: The learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 has filed a Pursis on 2-9-1999 stating that the respondent No. 1, namely, Madhukar Ramrao Bhuibhar, expired on 25-8-1999. The learned Counsel for the parties state that irrespective of the fact that the respondent No. 1 having expired on 25-8-1999, this petition will have to be disposed of on merits. In my opinion, the present petition requires to be considered on merits as election petitioner has died after the decision of the election petition in his favour and action survives.)

1.The petitioner Sudhakar Gangaram Bahale seeks to impugn the order dated 29th September, 1998 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati, in Election Petition No. 6/Ele-Pet/144-T of 1996-97 of Akola, under which he has set aside the election of the petitioner (original respondent No. 3) and declaring respondent No. 1 (original petitioner), Madhukar Ramrao Bhuibhar, as elected member till the Managing Committee completes its term, of Nilkanth Sahakari Soot Girni Ltd., Akola, a specified society within the meaning of section 73G of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Societies Act' for the sake of brevity).

2.Nilkanth Sahakari Soot Girni Ltd., Akola, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Society'), is a duly specified Society registered under the Societies Act, 1960 and its jurisdiction extends to Akola District. Elections to elect the Managing Committee of the Society had to be taken as provided under Chapter XI of the Societies Act and as per the provisions of the Maharashtra Specified Co-operative Societies Elections to Committee Rules, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Elections Rules' for the sake of brevity); therefore, the Collector, Akola, published an Election Programme on 26th March, 1997, for the said Society and appointed the Sub Divisional Officer at Akola as its Election Officer, to conduct the elections of the Managing Committee of the Society for incoming five years. In the Election Programme, there were several Constituencies, and from various Constituencies, the Committee Members were to be elected by the voters as per the Voters List. The dispute relates to the election of one member to the Managing Committee of the specified Society, from "Ginning, Pressing and Processing Co-operative Society", which has 13 voters in its Electoral College, who are entitled to elect one Member to the Managing Committee of the Society . The petitioner as well as the respondent No. 1 filed their nomination papers from this Constituency for contesting the elections. Their nomination papers were accepted. In the elections held, all the 13 voters had cast their votes by participating in the process of voting. Upon counting of votes, the petitioner received 7 votes and the respondent No. 1 polled 6 votes. The respondent No. 1 took objection in respect of the validity of two votes cast under ballot paper Nos. 017 and 018, but the Returning Officer rejected the objection in respect of the validity of these votes and these votes were allegedly held in favour of the petitioners. An application for recount of votes came to be made on the basis that these two ballot papers were invalid. The Returning Officer acceded to the request and recounted the votes, but rejected the objection that they were invalid votes and declared that the petitioner was elected as Member of the Managing Committee of the Society. The respondent No. 1 therefore, challenged the election by filing an Election Petition under section 144T of the Societies Act before the Additional Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati, which came to be registered as Election Petition No.6/Ele-Pet/144-T/96-97 of Akola. The petitioner filed his written statement on 11.8.1997. Though an application for stay also came to be filed before the Additional Commissioner, but the Additional Commissioner did not take cognizance of the same and no orders were pass













































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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