CWP No.18071 of 2010 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C. W. P. No. 18071 of 2010 Date of Decision: 8 - 10 - 2010 Nirmal Singh and another ....Petitioners v. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA *** Present: Mr.Pritam Saini, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms.Sudeepti Sharma, DAG, Punjab for respondents No.1 to 4. Mr.R.K.Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.5. *** KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) In the present petition, the petitioners have prayed that Election Notice and Programme dated 30.8.2010, Annexure P4, be set aside as the same is illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice. Counsel for the petitioners has drawn my attention to the order dated 25.6.2010 (Annexure P1) vide which as per notification dated 18.10.2002 four villages, namely, Chataihra, Gheora, Dhanauri and Kamalpur were detached from the Patiala Primary Co-operative Agricultural Development Bank Limited, Patiala (hereinafter to be referred as, `Patiala CWP No.18071 of 2010 [2] Bank') and were attached with the Samana Primary Co-operative Agricultural Development Bank Limited, Samana (hereinafter to be referred as, `Samana Bank'). Counsel has further drawn my attention to Annexure P2 to state that voters of aforesaid villages had voted for the election of managing committee of Patiala Bank, therefore, they cannot be permitted now to vote for Samana Bank and the zoning in itself is bad. Pursuant to order dated October 5, 2010, Mr.Kaur Singh, Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Patiala is present in Court. He has stated that those members who were enrolled with the Patiala Bank before 18.12.2002 were only permitted to vote in the election of managing committee of Patiala Bank and those who were enrolled after 18.12.2002 were only permitted to vote for the Samana Bank. This Court will be hesitant to determine the issue when especially the election programme has been notified. Even otherwise, the stand taken by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies is just and appropriate. Counsel for the petitioners has stated that Annexure P4 was verified on 30.8.2010 and election programme was to be issued by 5.9.2010 and till 17.9.2010, no notice was displayed on the notice Board or was served on the managing committee. This being a disputed question of fact cannot be determined in the writ jurisdiction. Hence, this contention is rejected. The next argument raised is that nomination papers were to be filed from 10.00 A.M. to 2.00 P.M. on 1.10.2010 and objections thereto were to be filed from 3.00 P.M. to 4.00 P.M. on the same day. Hence, sufficient time was not afforded to file the objections. CWP No.18071 of 2010 [3] This Court is of the view that once the election programme has been issued and notified, the election has to take place, therefore, the writ Court will be hesitant to interfere. Hence, there is no merit in the present petition and the same is dismissed, with no order as to costs. ( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA ) October 8, 2010. JUDGE RC