JUDGMENT

1. On 25/11/2022 we made the following order.

"1. These two Petitions relate to elections to the Abhinav Shetkari Shikshan Mandal in Bhayandar (East) District Thane. This is a Public Charitable Trust registered under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act 1950. It has two branches. It runs schools and colleges with an enrolment of 8000 students. In Civil Writ Petition No. 14537 of 2022, the 1st Respondent is the Trust. The 2nd Respondent is the Deputy Charity Commissioner, and the 3rd Respondent is the Election Officer. The 4th Respondent is the State of Maharashtra.

2. There is a controversy about who can represent the Trust and even today two Advocates have both claimed this right. We have no hesitation in denying both of them this privilege. We will decide at a later stage who should represent the Trust. That is not our concern at this stage at all.

3. Respondents Nos. 2, 3 and 4 are represented and waive service. In Writ Petition No. 13665 of 2022, the 1st Respondent is the State of Maharashtra, the 2nd Respondent is the Deputy Charity Commissioner, Thane, the 3rd Respondent is the Election Officer, and the 4th Respondent is one Mohan Madhukar Patil represented by Dr Saraf. He claims to be a member of the Trust and it is said that it is at his instance that a long-delayed election programme was initiated. The 5th Respondent to Writ Petition No. 13665 of 2022 is the Trust and, similarly, while it is joined, it will presently remain without active representation. Mohan Patil is to be joined as the 5th Respondent to Civil Writ Petition No. 14537 of 2022. Leave to amend. Amendment to be carried out forthwith without need of reverification.

4. The principal complaint here is that the election, already delayed, has been announced without a proper and thorough verification of the voters lists. There is at least one intervention application. In that intervention application, the applicants represented by Mr Thorat say, for example, that they although they are members, their names are not included in the voters list. Mr Shah for the Petitioner in Amol Kashinath Patil's Petition says that there are other problems as well. The voters list includes members who have passed away. They are still shown as eligible and on the membership rolls. More importantly, he asserts that names of some 99 persons have been entered on the voters list as members although these persons have never properly gained membership.

5. Dr Saraf on behalf of Mohan Madhukar Patil has filed an Affidavit in the Amol Patil Petition. The State Government has also filed an Affidavit. The paging errors are to be corrected. Mohan Madhukar's Patil Affidavit will have its paging commence after the end of the State Government Affidavit.

6. Dr Saraf submits that there is material on record to show that the Election Officer went through some exercise and this it is submitted is a verification of the voters list. The document shown to us at page 603 is a possibly inaccurate translation of the original document that starts at page 596, Exhibit "W" to the Amol Patil Petition. Prima facie this indicates that it is Mohan Patil who submitted a list of members including those who are registered from 2011 to 2014. Some registration fee receipts were also shown. Mohan Patil seems to have got his list notarised and there is mention of a comparison of the draft membership list with the original membership record book. The tabulation from page 598 has mention of a publication of a draft electoral member list, prescribing a date for filing objections and then a date for release of the final list (14/11/2022). Then there follows the programme for the conduct of the elections themselves.

7. We are not satisfied prima facie with the manner in which the draft list was addressed. Mr Shah for Amol Patil maintains that the Election Officer has apparently held that Amol Patil and other Petitioners did not submit documents establishing that certain other memberships were bogus or false. We do not