JUDGEMENT :

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of learned counsel appearing for the rival parties.

2. By this writ petition, the petitioners, who are Co-operative Societies and Members of respondent No.2 – Federal/Apex Society, have approached this Court for quashing and setting aside of final voters list published on 15/06/2022, by the respondent No.1 i.e. the District Deputy Registrar and the District Co-operative Election Officer of Co-operative Societies, Amravati, with a further prayer to direct the respondent No.1 to publish a fresh programme for finalization of voters list. The petitioners prayed for an interim direction to restrain the respondent No.1 from publishing election programme of the respondent No.2 - Federal Society.

3. While issuing notice on 17/06/2022, this Court took note of a specific judgment on which the petitioners placed reliance and interim relief was granted, restraining respondent No.1 from publishing election programme of the respondent No.2 – Federal Society. Upon receiving notices, the respondents appeared through counsel and filed replies, opposing the present petition.

4. Mr. K.P. Mahalle, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners relied upon the contents of the writ petition and contended that in the present case, the manner in which the respondent No.1 had published the final voters list demonstrated that more than 85% of voters i.e. member societies of the respondent no.2 – Federal Society were not included in the final voters list, thereby showing that the entire process of finalization of voters list was vitiated. It was submitted that the programme for finalization of voters list was not duly published and even the statutory requirements were not followed, as a consequence of which the petitioners were deprived of an opportunity to raise objections at the relevant time. It was further submitted that due to the defective manner in which the respondent No.1 proceeded with the process of finalization of voters list, the petitioners and other similarly situated member societies were deprived of an opportunity to raise objections at the opportune time and the final voters list came to be published, depriving more than 85% voters of their right to vote.

5. It was further submitted that the ostensible reason for non-inclusion of names of petitioner societies in the final voters list, was that such societies were allegedly defaulters. The petitioners and other such member societies were illegally branded as defaulters for not having paid 1% supervision charges to the respondent No.2 – Federal Society for the works allegedly allotted by the respondent No.2 – Federal Society to the petitioners and other member societies. It was submitted that, in the first place, in terms of the law laid down by this Court in the case of Bajrang Majoor Kamgar Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit and Others Vs. The District Co-operative Election Officer and Others (Judgment and order dated 29/04/2015, passed in Writ Petition No.2113/2015), non-payment of 1% supervision charges could not lead to the petitioners and other member societies being treated as defaulters making them ineligible for inclusion in the final voters list. It was further submitted that the respondent No.2 – Federal Society had stated fictitious figures towards alleged amounts due from the petitioners and other member societies towards 1% supervision charges. Therefore, the final voters list deserved to be quashed and a fresh programme ought to be declared by respondent No.1 for finalization of voters list.

6. It was submitted that the respondent No.2 was not justified in relying upon judgment of this Court in the case of M.I.D.C. Prakalpgrast Majur Kamgar, Sahakari Sanstha, Maryadit Vs. Amravati District Labour Cooperative Society's Union Ltd. and another (judgment and order dated 09/06/2016, passed in Writ Petition No. 527/2016), wherein it was held that non-payment of 1% supervision charges was a ground for hold