:1: :1: :1: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET 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 PETITION NO. 949 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO. 952 OF 2008 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s Orders Orders -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Vijay Patil for the petitioner. Ms.V.S. Mhaispurkar for respondent no.1. Mr.Amit Borkar for respondent no.4. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED: 12TH FEBRUARY,2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : 1. Heard Mr.Patil appearing for the petitioner. The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition against the decision of acceptance of the nomination paper of the Respondent no.5. 2. Mr.Patil appearing for the petitioner would urge that despite the remedy of Election :2: :2: :2: Petition, so also, other remedies available in law, this is a fit case where the undisputed position would show that the Respondent no.5 is disqualified on the ground that he was carrying on similar activities to that of the Society to which the elections are announced and likely to be held. 3. Reliance is placed upon the written objections, the date of receipt of the same and the endorsement of the Returning Officer to urge that the objections, if any, be considered. 4. The objection is to the effect that the Respondent no.5 is also carrying out business of distribution of petroleum products at a Petrol Pump alongwith his father, Respondent no.6, sitting MLA. 5. To my mind, such objections would have to be gone into at an appropriate proceedings which is contemplated under the Act. If the :3: :3: :3: disqualification has been incurred as urged, then, that fact will have to be established. It is not possible to do so in the limited jurisdiction that is conferred upon this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. More so, when remedies of filing a Election Dispute, so also, making a complaint to invoke Section 78 of the Co-operative Societies Act are available. The disputed questions now urged and raised before me cannot be decided in writ jurisdiction. Hence the Writ Petition is dismissed for want of equally efficacious remedy available in law. All contentions of both sides with regard to alleged wrongful acceptance of nomination paper and disqualification of Respondent no.5 are kept open. Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. sd/- *********