1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4914 OF 2010 (Dr. Pradeep Nagorao Aaglave & Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. OCTOBER 07, 2010. Heard Shri Samarth, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Kankale, learned AGP for respondents No. 1 to 4. The disputed questions of fact arise in the matter. Shri Samarth, learned counsel has contended that as there was no reservation as contemplated by Section 73(b) &(bb) of Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, the Election has to fall to ground in view of the settled position in this respect. He is also trying to demonstrate to this Court that no disputed questions of fact arise as Society through its Secretary has on earlier occasion taken inconsistent stand and suppressed all vital documents and information. When the disclosure became essential, the society directly disclosed Election Programme and by that time, nobody else could have participated in the elections. Shri Kankale, learned AGP states that the disputed questions arise and hence Election Petition under Section 91 of the Maharashtra Cooperative 2 Societies Act is a right remedy. At this stage, it is not possible for this Court to look into any disputed questions and make any observation presuming that the assertions of the petitioners are correct. I find that the remedy of filing Election Petition under Section 91 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act is the right remedy in such circumstances. Considering the grievance of the petitioners that such remedy consumes long time, the petitioners are given liberty to request to the Cooperative Court for its early adjudication. If such a request is made by the petitioners, the Cooperative Court should favourably consider the same. As alternate remedy is available, present petition is not entertained. No costs. JUDGE *GS.