1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.: 35 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO.: 11687 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.: 35 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO.: 11687 OF 2010 *** 1. Respondent NO.6 in writ petition has taken out this civil application contending that on 31st December, 2010 when this Court permitted petitioners to contest the election by interim orders, the fact of declaration of the result in so far is relevant in present matter, was not pointed out to this Court. He contends that 27th December, 2010 was the last date for withdrawal and on 28th December, 2010 list of contesting candidates was to be published. On that day, as from the constituency from which petitioner has been permitted to contest, there was only one nomination i.e. by Respondent No.6 and hence by following provision of Rule 56-X of the Rules framed under Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, respondent No.6 was declared 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.: 35 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO.: 11687 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. elected. According to him, in this situation the interim order needs to be recalled. 2. Learned counsel for Petitioner states that such interpretation and application of Rule 56-X is not proper. He has further pointed out that after orders dated 31st December, 2010 passed by this Court, election officer has published the list of contesting candidates showing petitioner and Respondent No.6 both as contesting from that constituency and election is now scheduled day after tomorrow i.e. 9th January, 2011. He further states that, at this stage, the Court should not interfere in this matter. Counsel submit that the matter is already made returnable on 14th January, 2011. 3. Both counsel state that they are in position to argue the matter on the same day. 4. In this situation, in the interest of justice, interim relief can be continued. 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.: 35 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO.: 11687 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. However, result of the scheduled election between Petitioner and Respondent No.6 shall not be announced until further orders from this Court. The participation in said election by Respondent No.6 shall be without prejudice to his contention and rights in the matter. 5. List the matter on 14th January, 2011 as already scheduled. In this view, civil application is disposed of. No costs. [B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J.] Dated:07/01/2011. ans/35