Point of Law: once an election process has been set in motion, though the High Court may entertain or may have already entertained a writ petition, it would not be justified in interfering with the election process giving direction to the election officer to stall the proceedings or to conduct the election process afresh, in particular when election has already been held in which the voters were allegedly prevented from exercising their franchise. As seen, that dispute is covered by an election dispute and remedy is thus available at law for redressal.

ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Cooperation.

2. Petitioner was Ex-Member of Sri Somavamsha Shasatrarjuna Kshatriya Mutually Aided Cooperative Thrift Society Limited, Hyderabad (second respondent herein). His membership was terminated by resolution dated 22.2.2020. Challenging the said termination, petitioner filed W P No. 15890 of 2020 which is pending consideration before this Court. Election notice was issued on 5.1.2021 to conduct elections to elect two Directors who are retiring by rotation. As per the schedule announced, nomination forms were available from 11.1.2021 to 20.1.2021; nominations were to be filed from 18.1.2021 to 22.1.2021 and election is scheduled to be held on 7.2.2021. One of the conditions imposed to contest the elections is that person must be a shareholder/member whose name is on the members’ rolls of the society as on 31.12.2020. As petitioner was terminated from membership, this clause is staring at him. He therefore represented to the Chairman of Election Committee on 16.1.2021 requesting him to permit him to file nominations as he is contesting the termination in writ petition pending consideration before the High Court and likely to be taken up. Said request of the writ petitioner was rejected vide intimation dated 20.1.2021 informing the petitioner that since he cease to be a member of the society and in view of first of the terms and conditions, he is not eligible to contest and therefore the question of permitting him to file nominations, does not arise. The said decision and election notification is assailed in this writ petition.

3. Extensive submissions are made by learned counsel for petitioner to persuade the Court to stop the election process or to direct the respondents to receive the nomination of the petitioner and to permit him to contest the election. Learned counsel for petitioner sought to contend that the termination of his membership of the society is ex-facie illegal as elementary principles required to be observed before terminating the membership were not followed, in as much as no notice or opportunity was given to the petitioner as admitted by second respondent management. That being so, as termination has civil and evil consequences, it is ex-facie illegal and unsustainable. Therefore, petitioner is deemed to be a member of the second respondent society and thus entitled to contest the election. Depriving the petitioner to contest the election would be offending Article 21 of the Constitution of India. He therefore pleads that it is a fit case for this Court to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and to direct the respondents to afford to petitioner opportunity to contest in the elections.

4. Two significant aspects which have bearing on the issue are relevant to be noticed. Firstly, process of election to elect two Directors in place of retiring Directors by rotation was set in motion on 5.1.2021 and elections are scheduled to be held on 7.2.2021; and secondly petitioner was not permitted to file nomination having regard to the first of the terms and conditions of the election notification and the last date for submission of nominations was over on 22.2.2021.

5. In the above backdrop, the issue for consideration is whether the writ petitioner is entitled to seek mandamus to direct the respondents to permit him to contest the elections after the election process is set in motion ?.

6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions of the learned counsel for petitioner.

7. Sections 23, Elections:--Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, rules and bye-laws of the society, the State Co-operative Election Authority constituted under the provisions of the Telangana Co-operative Societies Act, shall be vested with the authority for superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of electoral rolls and conduct of all elections to the Board of Directors:

Directo