THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.P.No.5416 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioners, 22 in number, seek a direction from this Court to declare the election notification issued by the second respondent on 16.02.2010, fixing the date of election to the first respondent society as 10.03.2010, as illegal, null, void and violative of Rule 22(b) of Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Rules, 1964 (for short ‘the Rules’). The petitioners claim to be members of the first respondent society. It is their case that, though they were admitted as members of the society in the General Body Meeting held on 04.04.2007, their names were not included in the voters’ list; and the election notification was issued proposing to hold elections on 10.03.2010, on the basis of a defective voters’ list. Section 61(3) of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 (for short ‘the Act’), reads thus:- “Every dispute relating to, or in connection with, any election to a committee of a society referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (3) of Section 31, shall be referred for decision to a Subordinate Judge, or where there is no such Subordinate Judge, to the District Judge having jurisdiction over the place where the main office of the society is situated, whose decision thereon shall be final”. Section 61(4) of the Act reads thus:- “Every dispute relating to, or in connection with any election shall be referred under sub-section (3) only after the date of declaration of the result of such election”. Questions whether the petitioners are members of the respondent society; whether their non-inclusion in the voters’ list is contrary to Rule 22(b) of the Rules; and whether such non- inclusion would render the very election illegal etc., are all matters to be examined by the competent Tribunal on an election petition being filed under Section 61(3) of the Act. The impugned notification, for elections to be held for appointment of the executive committee of the first respondent society, can neither be interdicted nor would this Court forestall elections on these grounds. Leaving it open to the petitioners, if they so choose, to avail the remedy of filing an election petition after the result of the elections are declared, the writ petition fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs. _________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J Date:09.03.2010 sj