{1} lpa111.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.1 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO.11131 OF 2010 Yusufkhan Sawarkhan Pathan & another Appellants Versus The State of Maharashtra & others Respondents Mr.T.G.Gaikwad, advocate for appellants. Mr.K.B.Choudhari, A.G.P for respondents no.1 to 3. Mr.A.M.Karad, advocate for respondent no.4. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE AND R.M.BORDE, JJ. DATE : 06 th January, 2011 PER COURT: 1 Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2 By this Letters Patent Appeal, the appellants have challenged the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge on 31.12.2010 in Writ Petition No.11131 of 2010. By this order, while issuing `Rule', the learned Single Judge has confirmed the ad interim order passed on 09.12.2010. By that order, ad interim relief in terms of prayer clause (C) and (F) was granted. 3 We have perused the order dated 31.12.2010. In our opinion, the order is a well reasoned order and deserves no {2} lpa111.odt interference by this Court in Letters Patent Appeal. 4 There is no dispute that the Returning Officer, who is now conducting the election, was appointed by the Assistant Registrar and that he is a Government employee. The voting, as per the election programme published by him 02.12.2010, is scheduled to be held on 09.01.2011. Keeping that in view and considering that the learned Single Judge has kept the option open to the parties to raise a Dispute before the Co-operative Court, we dismiss the Letters Patent Appeal. However, it is made clear that the result of the election, to be conducted by Respondent No.5, would be subject to final outcome of the writ petition. 5 Civil Application No.15 of 2011 does not survive and disposed of as such. R.M.BORDE D.B.BHOSALE JUDGE JUDGE adb/lpa111