JUDGMENT - D.G. KARNIK, J.:---The respondent No. 2 the Multipurpose Society registered under the provisions of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act is neither a specified society nor a notified society. Despite the term of the previous Managing Committee being over, no elections were held and, therefore the Registrar appointed respondent No. 4 as an Election Officer for holding the elections of the Managing Committee of the respondent No. 2-Society. Accordingly the elections were held on or about 24th June, 1998.

2. The learned Advocate for the petitioners states that no election rules framed under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act or the Rules framed thereunder in respect of societies which are not specified or notified societies. The procedure of election is governed by the bye-laws of the respective societies, as in the case of respondent No. 2.

3. The petitioners were elected members of the Managing Committee in the election held on 24th June, 1998. They had formed a panel and requested the Election Officer to allot them a common symbol. There were in all eleven vacancies which were divided into five groups/categories. Category No. 1 consisted of the borrower members of the society and there were six vacancies in this category. In the second category, there were two vacancies for women. For the remaining three categories viz. non borrower, weaker section and backward class members, there was one vacancy each. All the voters were expected to cast six votes in respect of borrower members category, two votes in respect of women members category and one vote each in respect of other three categories. The other candidates did not ask for a common symbol, but asked for different symbols as can be seen from the application annexed at page 18 to the petition. Despite this, for the other candidates, who also formed two different panels, two symbols were allotted to them. Symbol "Mango" was allotted to one panel and "Weighing Scale" was allotted to another panel. The petitioners panel was allotted a common symbol "Umbrella". The panel which was represented by the symbol "Umbrella" was elected.

4. One of the defeated candidates filed a dispute under section 91 of the Act bearing Dispute No. ACR/558/98 and some other defeated candidates filed another Dispute bearing No. ACR/563/98 for setting aside the elections on the ground that the elections were held contrary to the bye-laws of the respondent No. 2 Society. Bye-law No. 11 of the respondent No. 2 Society prescribes the procedure regarding preparation of voters list and allotment of symbols to the candidates. The original bye-laws are in Marathi. Sub-rule (3) of Rule 11 can be translated as follows :

11(3) When it is necessary to hold elections, the Election Officer shall consider allotment of symbols to the candidates in accordance with the choice mentioned in the nomination paper, and

(a) The Election Officer shall allot, as far as practicable as per the choice of the candidates, separate election symbols.

(b) If more than one candidate have exercised preference for same symbol, then allotment of such symbol should be determined by drawing a lot.

(c) The decision of the Election Officer regarding allotment of symbols shall be final and binding on all the candidates.

(d) Each candidate shall be informed about the symbol allotted to him immediately. (underlining supplied)

Clause (a) of sub-rule (3) of Rule 11 of the Bye-laws makes it clear that each candidate should be allotted a separate symbol. Clause (b) provides that when the same symbol is requested by two or more candidates, then after determining by lot, only one of them should be allotted that symbol. Thus, the Election Officer clearly erred in allotting one common symbol to all candidates of a panel. Each candidate in a penal ought to have been allotted a separate symbol. In view of this provisions, the Co-operative Court hearing the dispute under section 91, allowed the dispute and held that the election of the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document