JUDGMENT - KHANDEPARKAR R.M.S., J.:---Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Rule. By consent, the rule is made returnable forthwith.

2.The petitioner challenges the orders passed by the Returning officer and the appellate authority rejecting his nomination paper for election to the managing committing of the Janata Sahakari Bank Limited, Kurduwadi, hereinafter referred to as "the said society". The challenge is on the ground that inspite of the default having been cured prior to the disposal of the appeal under section 152 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, hereinafter referred to as "the said Act", the petitioner is being illegally denied the right to contest the said election in violation of the provisions of section 73-FF(1) of the said Act.

3.The programme for election of the managing committee of the said society was declared in November, 2002. Accordingly, the last date for filing of the nomination paper was 16-12-2002. The scrutiny was to take place on 17-12-2002. The last date of withdrawal of the nomination paper was 4-1-2003. The election is to be held on 19-1-2003. The petitioner had filed his nomination paper on 16-12-2002. Pursuant to the objection raised by the management of the said society in relation to the eligibility of the petitioner to contest the election on the ground that he was a defaulter in relation to the cash credit facility availed by him from the Pandharpur Merchant Co-operative Bank Limited, Pandharpur (hereinafter called as "the said bank"), the Returning Office rejected the nomination paper of the petitioner. In the appeal carried from the said order of the Returning Officer, the appellate authority while dealing with the same under section 152-A of the said Act confirmed the decision of the Returning Officer. It is also a matter of record that the petitioner had paid a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the said bank on 24-12-2002, prior to the decision of the Appellate Authority. Hence, the present petition.

4.While challenging the impugned orders, placing reliance in the decision of the learned Single Judge of this Court in the matter of (Ramesh Rajaram Patil v. Additional Commissioner, Aurangabad Division and others)1, reported in 1995(2) Bom.C.R. 264, as well as the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in (Pandurang Hindurao Patil v. State of Maharashtra and others)2, reported in 1983 Mh.L.J. 1081, and of the Apex Court in (Shri Sant Sadguru Janardan Swami (Moingiri Maharaj) Sahakari Dugdha Utpadak Sanstha and another)3, reported in 2002(2) Bom.C.R. (S.C.)149, the learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the impugned orders are contrary to the provisions of section 73-FF(1) of the said Act in as much as the settled law is that a person seeking to contest the election for the Managing Committee of a co-operative society is entitled to cure the default, if any, prior to the final decision on the scrutiny of the nomination papers, and as the petitioner had cleared all the dues of the said bank by 24-12-2002 and was not in default within the meaning of the said expression under the said provisions of law, both the authorities have acted illegally in rejecting the nomination paper of the petitioner. On the other hand, it was sought to be contended on behalf of the respondents that clearance of the default has to be prior to the last date of filing of the nomination papers and, admittedly, in the case in hand, the petitioner having continued to be a defaulter till 24-12-2002, the day much after the last date for filing of the nomination papers, no fault can be found with the impugned orders. In that regard, reliance is sought to be placed in the decision of the learned Single Judge of this Court in (Bhaulal Rajdhar Sonavane v. Returning Officer and others)4, reported in 1995(1) Bom.C.R. 354. It was also sought to be contended that the election process having been already commenced, there is no case for interference at this stage and alternative efficacious remedy is

Click Here to Read the rest of this document