The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Returning Officer must conduct a summary inquiry or grant the candidate an opportunity to rebut objections before rejecting a nomination paper based on technical defects in the experience certificate.

JUDGMENT

1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties.

2. Being aggrieved by the order passed by Respondent No.3- Returning Officer on 08.03.2021 thereby rejecting the nomination paper of the petitioner and the order dated 18.03.2021 passed by Respondent No.2-appellate authority in Appeal No.3/2021, confirming the same, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant petition.

3. The petitioner is the member of Respondent No. 5-Society and Respondent No.5-Society is the member of Respondent No.4-Bank. In terms of the election program for the year 2021-2026 of the Respondent No.4-Bank, the petitioner has submitted his nomination paper on 04.03.2021 and scrutiny of the nomination papers was held on 08.03.2021. The petitioner has submitted his nomination paper for the election of member of the Managing Committee of Respondent No.4-Bank from the constituency of Prathmik Krishi Purvatha Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Society and Dhanya Adhikosh Sahakari Society for Mahur taluka on 04.03.2021. The petitioner has also submitted experience certificate issued by Respondent No.5-Society certifying therein that the petitioner has experience of management of the committee.

4. During the course of scrutiny of nomination papers, on 08.03.2021, Respondent No.3-Returning Officer has rejected the nomination paper of the petitioner on the ground that the candidate should have experience of working on the managing committee of the society, however, in the certificate dated 03.03.2021, issued by Respondent No.5-Society, it is stated that the petitioner has experience of management of the committee.

5. Being aggrieved by the said order dated 08.03.2021, passed by Respondent No.3 - Returning Officer, the petitioner had preferred an appeal bearing No.3/2021 before the Divisional Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Latur Division, Latur, in terms of provisions of Section 152A of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (for short, herein after called as "Act of 1960"). After hearing both the parties, the appellate authority has dismissed the appeal bearing No.3/2021 by an order dated 18.03.2021. Said appeal came to be dismissed mainly on the ground that the petitioner has not placed on record experience certificate of the society to show that the petitioner has experience to work on the managing committee of the society in view of bye-law no.8(9)(2)A-2 of the Respondent-Bank. Hence, this petition.

6. Mr.Khandare, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submits that both the authorities below have failed to appreciate the said experience certificate issued by Respondent No.5-Society in favour of the petitioner. The said certificate has been issued by Secretary of Respondent No.5-Society certifying therein that the petitioner has experience of five years about the management of the society. The learned Counsel submits that Respondent No. 3-Returning Officer has raised the said objection suo motu and observed that in the certificate issued by Respondent No.5-Society, it is stated that the petitioner has experience of management work of the society, however, it should have been mentioned in the said certificate that the petitioner has experience of working on the managing committee.

7. Learned Counsel Mr.Khandare, appearing for the petitioner, submits that Rule 25 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies (Election to Committees) Rules, 2014 (for short, herein after called as "Rules of 2014") speaks about the scrutiny of the nomination papers. The learned Counsel submits that in terms of sub-rule (4) of Rule 25, the Returning Officer shall not reject any nomination paper on the ground of any defect which is not of a substantial character. Further, in terms of sub-rule (5) of Rule 25, the Returning Officer shall hold the scrutiny on the date appointed in this behalf under rule 18, and shall not allow any adjournment of the proceedings, except where such proceedings are in