ssm sm sm IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 5823 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 5823 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 5823 OF 2008 Sameer Hemant Shah ...Petitioner Vs. Sub-Registrar of Co-operative Societies, G.S.Region, Mumbai & Ors. ...Respondents. Mr.G.S.Hegade i/by Mr.Aditya Khanna for the Petitioner. Mr.P.P.Kakade, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 & 3. Mr.Jaideep Mitra & Mr.G.C.Mohanty i/by. Mohanty & Associates for Respondent No.5. CORAM CORAM CORAM : R.V.MORE, J. : R.V.MORE, J. : R.V.MORE, J. DATED DATED DATED : 7th August, 2008 : 7th August, 2008 : 7th August, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. . Heard Mr.Hegde the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, Mr.Kakade the learned AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 3 and Mr.Maitra, the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.5. 2. The petition pertains to the election of Managing Committee of Manish Commercial Premises Co-operative Society Ltd.. The Respondent No.5 is contesting the election by filing the nomination. The petitioner objected the Respondent No.5’s nomination on the ground that the person who proposed the Respondent No.5 is not authorized by M/s. Bongaigaon Refinery & Petrochemicals Ltd. who is the member of aforesaid housing society. The Respondent No.2, the Election Officer upheld the Petitioners objection and ( 2 ) rejected the nomination of Respondent No.5. The Respondent No.5 thereafter preferred an appeal under Section 152(A) of the Co-operative Societies Act-1960 before Respondent No.1, Sub-Registrar and the Respondent No.1 by the order impugned in the Petition quashed and set aside the order of Respondent No.2 rejecting the Respondent No. 5’s nomination, consequently nomination stood accepted. It is the settled position that the Courts should be slow in interfering in order accepting the nomination. The voting is scheduled to take place on 13th August, 2008. In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to interfere in the impugned order in exercise of my jurisdiction under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. 3. In the event of the Petitioner’s filing the Election Petition, challenging the Election of the Respondent No.5, the same be decided independently on its own merits and without being influenced by this order. 4. The Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. ( R. V. MORE, J.) R. V. MORE, J.) R. V. MORE, J.)