Bombay High Court
Najir Wajir Birbal And Others vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others on 9 February, 2017
Author: S. B. Shukre
Bench: S. B. Shukre
wp1471.17.doc
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 1471 OF 2017
1 Najir Wajir Birbal
age 45 years, occ. Agriculture
r/o Kahala(BK), Tq. Naigaon(Kh)
Dist. Nanded
2 Smita Madhavrao Kahalekar
age 40 years, occ. Agril
r/o as above.
3 Dhanraj s/o Ramesh Kahalekar
age 28 years, occ. Agril
r/.o as above.
4 Shiraj s/o Ramesh Kahalekar
age 22 years, occ. Agril
r/o as above.
5 Shivkanta Anantrao Kahalekar
age 40 years, occ. Agril
r/o as above.
6 Bhagyashree Rameshrao Kahalekar
age 25 years, occ. Agril
r/o as above.
7 Rajnandini Rameshrao Kahalekar
age 23 years, occ. Agril
r/o as above.
8 Madhukar s/o Tolba Bhosikar
age 50 years, occ. Agril
r/o as above.
9 Balaji s/o Shankarrao Buddhe
age 45 years, occ. Agril
r/o as above
10 Pushpabai Balaji Buddhe
age 35 years, occ. Agril
r/o as above.
11 Sangita Anandrao Kahalekar
age 40 years, occ. Agril
r/o as above
::: Uploaded on - 09/02/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 11/02/2017 01:06:22 :::
wp1471.17.doc
2
12 Subhadra Ganpatrao Kahalekar
age 65 years, occ. Agril
r/o as above.
13 Subhash s/o Gangaram Kahalekar
age 45 years, occ. Agril
r/o as above.
14 Vishwanath s/o Gangaram Kahalekar
age 40 years, occ. Agril
r/o as above.
15 Razak Bashirsab Birbal
age 45 years, occ. Agril
r/o as above.
16 Rajesh s/o Balaji Vhande
age 24 years, occ. Agril
r/o as above.
17 Shantabai Mahdukarrao Bhosikar
age 45 years, occ. Agril
r/o as above
18 Sunanda Manohar Kahalekar
age 45 years,occ. Agril
r/o as above
19 Gangabai Vishwanath Kahalekar
age 35 years, occ. Agril
r/o as above
20 Nirmala Vishwanath Kahalekar
age 35 years,occ. Agril
r/o as above
21 Gajanan s/o Manohar Kahalekar
age 25 years, occ. Agril
r/o as above.
22 Lahu s/o Laxman Kahalekar
age 48 years, occ. Agril
r/o as above. .. PETITIONERS
VERSUS
1 The State of Maharashtra
Through its Corporation & Textile Department
Mantralaya, Mumbai 32
Through its Secretary
::: Uploaded on - 09/02/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 11/02/2017 01:06:22 :::
wp1471.17.doc
3
2 The State Cooperative Election Authority
Central Administrative Building
Pune
3 District Cooperative Election Officer &
District Deputy Registrar
Cooperative Societies
Nanded, dist. Nanded
4 The Taluka Cooperative Election Officer &
Assistant Registrar Cooperative Societies
Naigaon, TQ. Naigaon, dist. Nanded
5 The Returning Officer
Seva Sahakari Society Ltd.
Kahala (Bk), Tq. Naigaon(Kh)
Dist. Nanded
6 Seva Sahakari Society Ltd
Kahala(Bk), Tq. Naigaon(Kh)
Dist. Nanded
Through its Secretary/Administrator .. RESPONDENTS
Mr. S.B. Ghatol Patil, advocate for petitioners.
Mr. A.P. Basarkar, AGP for the State.
Mr. S.K. Kadam, advocate for respondent nos. 2 to 5.
Mr. U.M.Maske, advocate for respondent no. 6.
=====
CORAM : S. B. SHUKRE, J.
DATE : 9th FEBRUARY, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
2. Heard finally by consent of learned counsel for the respective parties.
3. Reply filed on behalf of respondent no. 4 so also respondent no. 6 is taken on record.
::: Uploaded on - 09/02/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 11/02/2017 01:06:22 :::wp1471.17.doc 4
4. The main grievance raised in this petition is that no prior approval of Taluka Co-operative Election Officer as required under Rule 75(2)(b) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Election to Committee Rules, 2014, has been taken and, the time set for each of the stage of the election process under Rule 75 has also not been followed while preparing the election programme.
5. Reply filed on behalf of respondent no. 4 shows that no prior approval as required under Rule 75(2)(b) of the Rules has been obtained. Such prior approval is mandatory and, therefore, the election programme has stood vitiated. That apart, time for completion of each of the stages of election process set under rule 75 has also not been followed in the election programme and, therefore, on this count also, the election programme would have to be held as invalid in the eyes of law. As an instance, item no.
9 in the election programme, which sets time limit for withdrawal of the nomintion can be cited. In the election programme, for the stage of withdrawal of nomination papers, a period of only one week has been granted, whereas under Rule 75(2)(b) of the Rules, the minimum time which must be granted for withdrawal of nomination paper is of 15 days.
6. In the circumstances, the impugned order dated 13 th January, 2017 as well as the election programme need to be quashed and set aside. Writ petition is accordingly partly allowed with costs. Impugned order dated 13th January, 2017 and, the election programme published on 7 th January,2017, are hereby quashed and set aside. Fresh election ::: Uploaded on - 09/02/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 11/02/2017 01:06:22 ::: wp1471.17.doc 5 programme, by following the mandatory provisions of law, may be published within reasonable period of time. All contentions of parties including the one relating to inclusion of names in the voters list are kept open. Rule made absolute in above terms.
7. Authenticated copy of the order be furnished to respondent no. 4 through the learned counsel.
( S. B. SHUKRE )
ig JUDGE
dyb
::: Uploaded on - 09/02/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 11/02/2017 01:06:22 :::