1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 701/2011 (Gulabrao R. Dongre & another VERSUS The State of Mah. & others) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri P.R. Puri, counsel for the petitioners. Shri Ambarish Joshi, A.G.P. for the R-1. Shri R.M. Pande h/f Shri S.P. Bhandarkar, counsel for the R-5. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : FEBRUARY 10 , 2011 . By this petition, the petitioners impugn the order passed by the Election Officer on 07.02.2011 rejecting the objection raised by the petitioners as regards the inclusion of the names of 50 persons in the voters list. It appears from the impugned order that there was a resolution of the Governing Body dated 15.12.1994, by which the membership of the 50 persons was approved. The cash book further showed that the membership fees was also accepted from the 50 members. The submission made on behalf of the petitioners, that at no point of time, the name of Sau. Anuradha Tumpalliwar appeared in Schedule-I and, hence, the meeting could not have been conducted by her, is liable to be rejected for the reason that the name of Mrs. Anuradha Tumpalliwar appears in the copy of the Schedule-I, which is annexed to the writ petition. Even otherwise, the election program has been declared and the last date of filing the nominations is 11.02.2011. 2 In such circumstances, it would not be in the interest of justice to interfere with the impugned order in exercise of the writ jurisdiction, specially when disputed questions of facts are involved in the instant petition. The petitioners would have a right to challenge the change report in case, they so desire. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE APTE