1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.193 OF 2008 R.K.Benewal. ..Petitioner. V/s. Gurukripa Co-op.Hsg.Soc. ..Respondent. None for petitioner. Mr.G.N.Salunke for Respondent. Later on Mr.S.K.Shinde i/b. Sagar Kasar for petitioner. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J DATE : JANUARY 31, 2008. DATE : JANUARY 31, 2008. DATE : JANUARY 31, 2008. P.C. : P.C. : P.C. : 1. None appears for the Petitioner, when the matter is called out. Dismissed for non-prosecution. 2. Later on Mr.Shinde, advocate for Petitioner appeared and mentioned the matter for restoration of the Petitioner, as he was held up in some other court. For the reason mentioned across the bar, request for recalling the order passed in morning session is accepted. Accordingly, Writ Petition is restored to the file to its original number and heard forthwith by consent. 3. This Petition essentially takes exception to 2 the Order dated 28th August, 2006 passed by the Dy. Registrar, Co-Operative Society MHADA u/section 77(A) of the M.C.S.Act, 1960, which order came to be confirmed by the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-op.Societies in Appeal No.185 of 2007 vide Order dated 17th December, 2007, which is also subject matter of the challenge in the present Petition. It is not in dispute that in the mean time, the election process has already commenced. The election date is now notified as 10th February, 2008. In view of this development and the fact that election will be soon conducted and newly elected body will take over charge of the Managing Committee, there is no reason to interfere in exercise of writ jurisdiction. 4. Counsel for the Petitioner however, submits that the Administrator has appointed Mr. P.G.Palvankar as Election Officer who according to the Petitioner is an impartial person. The Petitioner would rely on the circumstance, such as FIR registered by the said Palvankar that nomination form of the Petitioner has been stolen-so as to affect election prospects of the Petitioner. It is not necessary to examine those questions in the present proceedings. 3 5. It will be open to the Petitioner to question the appointment of said Mr.Palvankar in appropriate proceedings, to which he may resort, as may be permissible by law. The said proceedings questioning the impartiality of Mr.Palvankar as election officer will have to be considered in accordance with the law uninfluenced by the fact of upholding the impugned order or rejection of the Writ Petition. 6. Petition disposed of on the above terms. (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J)