1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.:8593 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. WRIT PETITION NO.:8593 OF 2010 *** Vijaykumar Karbhari Golhar VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra And Anr *** Mr. Chate Vitthal M., Advocate for Petitioner Mrs. V. A. Shinde, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Tulshidas J. Poul, Advt For R/3. *** 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties, so also the learned counsel for the Intervenor. 2. By this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking direction to Respondent No.2 to notify the names of 13 elected members of the managing committee of Multi Purpose Cooperative Society Ltd. Bavi, Taluka Ashti, District Beed as provided for under 73 (3) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. Such prayer in is made contending that the elections were conducted after following the due procedure and that the petitioner and twelve others got elected 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.:8593 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. unopposed. Respondent NO.2 has filed reply affidavit stating that one Shri S.S.Vahane, who was appointed as Election Officer, vide his letter 3rd May, 2010 sought permission to withdraw his consent to act as an election officer and that such permission was granted vide order dated 4th May, 2010. Learned counsel for the Election Officer admits that he had tendered the letter dated 3rd May, 2010. However, he submits that the order dated 4th May, 2010 was not communicated to him. Learned counsel for the Petitioner invited our attention to the Outward Register to contend that the entry in respect of receipt of the letter of the Election Officer dated 3rd May, 2010, made by the office of Respondent No.2 is manipulated at the instance of Respondent No.2. The disputed questions cannot be gone into in the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. From the reply 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.:8593 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. affidavit it is clear that elections were not conducted by following the due procedure and, therefore, the claim of the petitioner that he along with twelve others got elected unopposed does not appear to be correct. Hence the direction, as prayed for in the writ petition, cannot be granted. The writ petition, therefore, fails and dismissed as such. The Assistant Registrar shall proceed to hold fresh elections of the society by following the due procedure and by appointing some responsible officer from his office as election officer for conducting the elections. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. [S. B. DESHMUKH, J.] [D. B. BHOSALE, J.] Dated:11/07/2011. ans/8593