SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Bom) 1044

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
A.S. CHANDURKAR, JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.
The Ashwamedh C.H.S. Ltd. and ors. – Appellants
Versus
Shri. Suresh Khedkar and ors. - Respondents
Interim Application No. 2202 of 2024 In Writ Petition No. 2197 of 2024.
Decided on : 01-03-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. S.S. Kanetkar i/b Mr. Saurav N. Katkar, Mr. Shantanu Raktate
For the Respondent: Mr. Dilip Bodake, Mr. N.C. Walimbe, Addl. G.P. a/w Mr. S.P. Shetye, AGP

The deletion of names from a voters list without a written decision and proper hearing violates procedural rules, necessitating reconsideration of objections.

Headnote:(A) Maharashtra Co-operative Societies (Election to Committee) Rules, 2014 - Rule 4 and Rule 8 - Deletion of names from final voters list - Petitioners challenged the deletion of their names from the final voters list for elections of a Housing Society, alleging non-compliance with procedural rules - The District Co-operative Election Officer failed to provide a written decision regarding the objections raised, leading to an arbitrary deletion of names. (Paras 2, 3, 4)

(B) Election Procedure - The court emphasized the necessity of adhering to procedural rules in electoral processes, particularly the requirement for a written decision on objections raised against provisional voters lists. (Paras 3, 4)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners and interveners contested the deletion of their names from the final voters list, claiming it was done without proper procedure as outlined in the Rules of 2014.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the deletion of names was contrary to Rule 8(3) of the Rules of 2014, as no written decision was provided by the District Co-operative Election Officer.

Issues: The main issue was whether the deletion of names from the voters list was conducted in accordance with the procedural requirements set forth in the Rules of 2014.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the deletion of names without a written decision and without hearing the affected voters was arbitrary and contrary to the established rules, necessitating a fresh consideration of the objections.

Result: Writ petition disposed of with directions for reconsideration of objections.

JUDGMENT :

A.S. Chandurkar, J. - Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith and heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. The grievance raised by the Petitioner Nos. 3 to 17 as well as the Applicants in Intervention Application No.2202 of 2024 is the wrongful deletion of their names from the final voters list for being eligible to vote at the elections of Petitioner No.1 Housing Society. The said Housing Society is a Type-E Society in accordance with Rule 4 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies (Election to Committee) Rules 2014 (for short, Rules of 2014). In the provisional voters list that was published on 25/01/2024, the names of 71 members including the present Petitioners and interveners were shown. It is the grievance of the Petitioners and interveners that an objection to exclusion of their names from the provisional voters list was raised and in a manner contrary to the Rules of 2014, the names of 33 members came to be deleted and the final voters list comprising of 38 members came to be published on 06/02/2024. It is in this backdrop that the present writ petition came to be filed on 14/02/2024 seeking to raise a challenge to the deletion of almost 50% voters from the final voters list.

3. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and we have perused the documents on record including affidavit in reply filed by Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. We find that under Rule 8 of the Rules of 2014 after publication of the provisional list of voters, claims and objections with regard to any omission or error in the name or address or other particulars in the list are required to be brought to the notice of the concerned District Co-operative Election Officer. The District Co-operative Election Officer after making such inquiry as necessary is required to consider each claim or objection and thereafter give his decision in writing to the persons concerned within a period of 10 days from the last date for receiving such claims and objections. When we inquired with the learned Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 as regards the decision of the District Co-operative Election Officer dealing with the objections raised resulting in deletion of the names of 33 voters, we are informed that there is no such decision in writing given by the District Co-operative Election Officer. It is thus obvious that names of almost 50% of the voters whose names were included in the provisional voters list have been deleted in a manner contrary to Rule 8 of the Rules of 2014.

4. We are conscious of the fact that the election programme has been published and presently the same is at the stage of candidates withdrawing their nominations till 07/03/2024. In our view, without disturbing the election programme and without interfering with the same, the grievance limited to illegal and arbitrary deletion of the names of 33 voters from the provisional voters list can be considered. Since the names of these 33 voters have been deleted in a manner contrary to Rule 8(3) of the Rules of 2014 even without hearing them, the following order would, in our view, serve the ends of justice:-

    (i) The District Co-operative Election Officer or any other Officer duly appointed by Respondent No.2 from the list of Election Officers on the Panel of the State Co-operative Election Authority or any other eligible Officer nominated by the Respondent No.2 shall consider the objections afresh, giving an opportunity to the said 33 voters which include the Petitioners and interveners. To enable this exercise to be undertaken, Respondent No.2 shall indicate the name of the concerned Officer by 04/03/2024 who shall deal with such objections under Rule 8 of the Rules of 2014. The Petitioners and the interveners shall appear before the said Officer on 05/03/2024 at 11.00 a.m. By 08/03/2024 the aforesaid objections shall be decided.

    (ii) Subject to this exercise parties are free to work out their rights.

5. Keeping the aspect of eligibility of the voters open, the writ petition is disposed of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top