S.C. Dharmadhikari, J.

1. The petitioners pray by this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India that the respondents and particularly the Election Officer be directed to include 124 names in the list of voters for elections and which are scheduled for the constitution of a committee to manage and administer the affairs of Shivanand Cooperative Housing Society Ltd.

2. The argument of Mr.Oak learned counsel appearing in support of this petition is two-fold:

3. He firstly submits that though The Maharashtra Co-operative Societies (Elections to Committee) Rules, 2014 are notified by the statute, they supersede all prior Rules. By Rule 78 of these rules in part XI it is stated that no election shall be called in question except by an Election Petition presented to the Co-operative Court as laid down in section 91. Mr.Oak submits that because of the supersession of the prior Rules, what has remained thereafter and in the present set of Rules is the procedure for holding elections. However, as notified by the same statute in other rules and particularly Maharashtra Specified Societies (Elections to Committees) Rules all details such as necessary parties to the Election Petition, format in which it is to be filed, grounds on which elections can be declared as invalid and set aside are not dealt with by the 2014 Rules.

These material and relevant aspects being not provided in the 2014 Rules, the remedy of an Election Petition provided therein cannot be said to be equally efficacious and complete. Hence, this writ petition therefore, should be entertained as the alternate remedy is illusory.

4. His second contention is that this is a slum rehabilitation project governed by Appendix 'S' appended to the Development Control Regulations, 1994 for the city of Thane. That envisages a project by the co-operative societies of slum dwellers and which is permitted to undertake redevelopment activity under the control of the authorities, provided the authorities certify a list of slum dwellers to be eligible for a permanent housing accommodation. Mr.Oak submits that there is no dispute about this part of the matter. That list has now been notified and which contains 288 names. These very names would comprise of the voters list meaning thereby that all those certified as eligible for permanent alternate accommodation or styled as 'eligible slum dwellers' should find their name and details entered in the voter's list as a voter. There is no other step which is required to be undertaken. The process is automatic. All those whose names are entered as eligible slum dwellers would be therefore, entitled to vote at these elections. They are thus eligible voters. The name of the petitioners have been entered in the list of eligible slum dwellers but, some of them have been erroneously and wrongfully excluded from the voter's list. Such being the position and remedy of a Election petition being incomplete and inefficacious, this Court should entertain the writ petition. Our attention is invited to the complaints which have been made by the petitioners to the authorities and others so also the response of the authorities. It is argued that the authorities are assuming and to themselves a power which is absent in the Regulations. In the circumstances, by relying upon the two judgments of this Court in the case of RAJAN DINKARRAO PHARATE VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS 1997 (12) Mh.L.J. 543 and SHIVAJI MAROTRAO SURYAWANSHI VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ors 2000 (2) Mh.L.J. 306 it is urged that the writ petition is maintainable.

5. After having heard Mr.Oak learned counsel for the petitioners at great length and on perusing with his assistance the petition and all the annexures thereto, so also the recently notified The Maharashtra Co-operative societies (Election to Committee) Rules 2014 we are unable to agree with him. These Rules have been notified and from the definitions it is apparent that the term “Committee “ has been defined to mean th