Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH
S.G. MEHARE, J.
Sanjay @ Raosaheb Yadavrao Waghchaure – Petitioner
Versus
The State Co-operative Election Authority, Maharashtra State – Respondent
Writ Petition Nos. 6, 8, 23, 31, 371, 372, 380 of 2024, C.A. Nos. 454, 455 of 2024
Decided On : 16-01-2024
Election Dispute - Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 - Section 25-A, Section 26, Section 27, Rule 11 of the M.C.S. Election Committee Rules, 2014 - The court dismissed the writ petitions challenging the order of the District Co-operative Election Officer cum Regional Assistant Director, which rejected objections to the provisional voters list for the elections of the Managing Committee of a sugar factory. The objections raised by the petitioners were found to be beyond the jurisdiction of the Election Officer and were not tenable. The court held that the objections were not within the ambit and scope of Rule 11 and only the Registrar had the power to deal with such objections. The court also found that the election was at an advanced stage and that there was no patent illegality in preparing the voters list, and the relevant rules and laws were correctly applied and adhered to by the Election Officer.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged the order of the District Co-operative Election Officer cum Regional Assistant Director, which rejected objections to the provisional voters list for the elections of the Managing Committee of a sugar factory. The objections raised by the petitioners were related to the membership and voter eligibility criteria, including issues such as fraudulent activities, inclusion of non-residents and members without land, and failure to conduct audits and consider legal provisions.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the objections raised by the petitioners were beyond the jurisdiction of the Election Officer and were not tenable. The court held that the objections were not within the ambit and scope of Rule 11 and only the Registrar had the power to deal with such objections. The court also found that the election was at an advanced stage and that there was no patent illegality in preparing the voters list, and the relevant rules and laws were correctly applied and adhered to by the Election Officer.
Issues: The issues involved in the case included the jurisdiction of the Election Officer to consider objections to the provisional voters list, the scope of enquiry on the objections, the necessity of issuing notices to the persons against whom objections were raised, the legality of changing the cut-off date for the voters list, and the interpretation of Bye-law no. 8 regarding the payment of the difference amount of the raised share value.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the objections raised by the petitioners were beyond the jurisdiction of the Election Officer and were not tenable. The court also found that the election was at an advanced stage and that there was no patent illegality in preparing the voters list, and the relevant rules and laws were correctly applied and adhered to by the Election Officer.
Final Decision: The court dismissed all the writ petitions challenging the order of the District Co-operative Election Officer cum Regional Assistant Director, which rejected objections to the provisional voters list for the elections of the Managing Committee of a sugar factory. The court found no substantial ground to warrant interference with the impugned orders of the Election Officer rejecting the objections. The rule was discharged, and no order as to costs was made.
JUDGMENT :
S.G. MEHARE, J.
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of the parties.
2. By these writ petitions, an order dated 14.12.2023 of District Co-operative Election Officer cum Regional Assistant Director (Sugar), (DCEO for short), Chattrapati Sambhaji Nagar (Aurangabad)/respondent No. 2 passed on 14.12.2023 has been impugned.
3. The petitioner, namely Sanjay Yadavrao Waghchaure, had raised the following objections to the provisional voters list published on 24.11.2023 for the elections of Managing Committee of Sant Eknath Sugar Factory Ltd, Taluka Paithan, District Chattrapati Sambhajinagar:
(ii) So long as around the original 18,645 members were inappropriately dealt with by modifying the membership list.
(iii) The provisional voter list violated Section 25-A of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (the M.C.S. Act for short). No proceedings contemplated under that Section were undertaken to remove the members. Still, many members were removed from the list at the whims and fancies of the present Managing Committee.
(iv) A large number of members who were not the residents of the area of operation of the Society were incorporated as members of the said Society.
(v) A large number of members who were holding no lands required as per the law were incorporated.
(vi) No audit was conducted to arrive at the conclusive figures of the members as is expected under law.
(vii) Around 5000 members who did not satisfy the basic qualifications to be members have been shown as members of the Society. Many members have not satisfied the sugarcane supply criteria for five continuous years. Hence, they were not qualified as per clause No. 17(A)(3)(IV).
(viii) The applications for transferring the shares made by the legal heirs of the original members were not decided, and the provisional voters list was prepared hastily.
(ix) Respondent No. 2 has not properly appreciated the concept of Bye-laws No. 6 and 8 of the Society’s Bye-laws.
(x) The voters who were disqualified under Section 27(10) of the M.C.S. Act have been approved as valid voters in the provisional voters list. Unless the member is legally disqualified for the reasons of defaulter, such members cannot be ineligible to be a member or voter as maintained as per Schedule-I of the M.C.S. Act. In the present case, there is no reference to the submission of I-Register; even maintenance of the same is strictly not in compliance with the M.C.S. Act and by-laws, which provide additional qualification or disqualification. The provisional voter list was inconsistent with Section 38 r/w Schedule-I of the M.C.S. Act.
(xi) Respondent No. 2 has not appreciated the certificates issued by the Talathi, incurring disqualification of the members included in the voters list correctly.
4. The other objections in other petitions were:
(ii) The agriculturists with no land were illegally admitted as members and added to the voter list.
(iii) A minor not qualified to be a member was admitted as a member of Society.
(iv) The members were not defaulters for not paying the difference of raised share value.
5. Heard the respective learned counsels at length.
6. The following points arise for consideration:
(ii) What is the scope of enquiry on the objection under Rule 11 of the M.C.S. Election Committee Rules, 2014?
(iii) Whether the issuance of notice to the persons against whom the objections were noticed was essential in the facts and circumstances of the case?
(iv) Whether the provisional list is defective for changing the cut-off date?
(v) Does By-law no. 8 extend three years to clear the difference of raised share value as provided under By-law no. 6?
(vi) W
The main legal point established in the judgment is that objections to the provisional voters list for co-operative society elections must be within the jurisdiction of the Election Officer and must ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the prima facie evidence of the membership register and the limitations on the jurisdiction of deciding the claims and objections to the voters lis....
The Election Officer's authority under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies (Election to Committee) Rules is limited to correcting errors in the provisional voters list, and does not extend to adjud....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the absence from the I and J register alone cannot justify the exclusion of voters from the final voters list. The court emphasized the sig....
The court ruled that the provisional voters' list must be based on the correct date as per statutory rules, emphasizing compliance with election regulations.
The prescribed procedure under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies (Election to Committee) Rules, 2014, including provisions for challenging voter identity and preventing impersonation, must be fol....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
