1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4466/2010 ASHOK ANANDRAO DHAPODKAR AND ANOTHER ..versus.. THE COLLECTOR, NAGPUR AND ANOTHER =-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders of directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-== Shri A.M.Ghare, Counsel for petitioner. C ORAM : D.K.DESHMUKH AND R. K. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATED : 13 th SEPTEMBER, 2010 . 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The name of the petitioner was included in a provisional list of voters as a representative of The Panchasheel Consumer Co-operative Society, but the Collector while publishing the final list of voters has deleted the name of the petitioner and has included in its place the name of Prabhakar Vitthalkar Adyalkar, as a representative of the society. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners states that an application was made under sub-rule 2 of Rule 5 of the Maharashtra Specified Cooperative Societies Election Committees Rules, 1971, after finalization of the list of voters. 4. Admittedly, the final list of voters was 2 published on 8.3.2010. Admittedly, there is no resolution passed by the society changing the name of its delegate after publication of the final list of voters. The application of the society, therefore, cannot be related to the provisions of sub-rule 2 of Rule 5, which lay down that, “a society which has communicated the name of its delegate shall by like resolution be permitted to change the name of its delegate not later than 7 days before the date appointed by the Collector under Rule 16 of the said Rules for making nominations”. 5. Obviously, therefore, if a society passes a resolution after finalization of the list of voters changing the name of its delegate, the above quoted portion of sub-rule 2 of Rule 5 will come into play and not otherwise. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners himself states that so far as sub-rule 5 of Rule 5 is concerned, it will not come into play. Thus, according to us, if according to the petitioner his name has been wrongly deleted from the final list of voters, his remedy is to file the election petition after the election is over. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE Rvjalit