( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4716 OF 2010 Rustum s/o Shankar Kale PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others RESPONDENTS .... Mr. N.D. Sonavane, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. D.R. Korade, AGP for the respondent/State. Mr. Dilip Bankar Patil, advocate, holding for Mr. P.B. Salunke, advocate for the respondent No. 4. .... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 18th June, 2010] PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel. 2. The petitioner challenges acceptance of nomination form of the respondent No.4. The elections of Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Society Limited of village Babhulgaon (Bk.) for the years 2010-2015 are in the offing. The nomination forms were to be submitted on or before 20th May, 2010. The scrutiny of the nomination form was to be completed on 24th May, 2010. The Returning Officer noticed that the respondent No. 4 was not in arrears of dues of the Aurangabad Zilla Parishad Employees Cooperative Credit Society. The contention of the ( 2 ) petitioner was that he was disqualified due to the fact that he was defaulter and, therefore, disqualification was incurred under section 73FF of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. The objection of the petitioner was rejected after considering the explanation submitted by the respondent No. 4. 3. Having considered the relevant documents and on hearing counsel for the parties, it is amply clear that the respondent No. 4 is retired employee of the Zilla Parishad. It prima facie appears from the reply-affidavit and the copy of the communication issued by the Secretary of the Aurangabad Zilla Parishad Employees Cooperative Credit Society Limited that on 26th March, 2008, the District Veterinary Officer was informed to deduct the due amount from the amounts which were payable to the respondent No. 4. It appears from the communication dated 18th October, 2008, a copy of which is placed on record, that such deduction was made and necessary information was given by the Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Aurangabad to the Chairman of the Zilla Parishad Employees Cooperative Credit Society Limited. It also appears that due to the objection raised by the petitioner, the respondent No. 4 again deposited a part of the amount which was allegedly due from him by depositing the ( 3 ) amount in the account of the Patsanstha (society) before the decision was taken on the nomination paper. That was done under protest. Considering the rival submissions and the documents, it is quite manifest that the petition involves disputed questions of fact. Hence, it is dismissed. No costs. 4. The observations in this order, however, be not considered if, ultimately, a regular election petition is filed by the petitioner or anyone against the election of the respondent No. 4, in case the respondent No. 4 is elected. [V.R. KINGAONKAR] JUDGE NPJ/wp4716-10