1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. L. P. A. NO. 402 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 4260 OF 2011 Zamsing Bhuraji Yerne vs. S. D. O.-cum-Returning Officer, Distt. Central Cooperative Bank Gondia & Others _______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders. ______________________________________________________________________________ Shri Abhijit Deshpande Adv for appellant. Shri Gadhia Adv for respondent no.2. Shri Pathan AGP for respondent 1. CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI & A.B.CHAUDHARI, JJ. DATED : NOVEMBER 09, 2011. Heard Shri Deshpande learned counsel for the appellant, Shri Gadhia learned counsel for the respondent no.2 and Shri Pathan learned AGP for respondent no. 1 and 4. Contention is learned Single Judge could not have interfered with election process and disturbed it just two days prior to voting. Reference is being placed on the judgment of learned Single judge in 2005(4) ALL M R 626 Gadhinglaj Taluka Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Vs. Collector of Kolhapur & Another. 2 We have perused the impugned judgment delivered by learned Single Judge. We find that after considering bye-law no. 35(2) of the Specified Cooperative Societies Election by which elections were being held, Learned Single Judge has found present appellant disqualified to contest the election. Therefore, his nomination paper was directed to be rejected. These findings are not demonstrated to be either erroneous or perverse. Division Bench of this Court have time and again held that if such interference has the effect of protecting the election process or furthering it, in extra ordinary jurisdiction the Courts can interfere. Judgments are reported in 2004(5) Maharashtra Law Journal 785 Mataraju Ghavghave Vs. Returning officer and 2006(3) Maharashtra Law Journal 592 Dalsingh s/o Shamsing Rajput Vs. State of Maharashtra and others and here the interference by learned Single Judge is to further the election process. We, therefore, do not find any jurisdictional error or perversity. L. P. A. is rejected. JUDGE JUDGE svk