1 wp5682.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.5682 OF 2011 Sampatrao Bandu Mangade & Ors. : Petitioners V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. : Respondents .... Mr.S.A.Pawar for the petitioners. Ms S.S.Bhende, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for respondent nos.1 to 3. Mr.P.S.Dani i/b. Ms Manjiri S. Parasnis for respondent no.4. .... CORAM : D.D. SINHA & A.R.JOSHI, JJ. DATE : JULY 29, 2011. P.C.: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respective respondents. 2. Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the grievance of the petitioners is in respect of the procedure followed by the respondent no.4 society while conducting the election of the society which is scheduled to take place tomorrow i.e. on 30.7.2011. The counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the society has violated its own bye-laws by appointing its 2 wp5682.11 own person as an Election Officer, though the share capital of the respondent no.4 society is above Rs.50 lakhs. Similarly, it is contended that the Election Officer has published two election programmes, one dated 1.6.2011 and the second dated 14.6.2011. It is also submitted that the voters’ list was not published nor objections thereto were invited, etc. It is submitted that the petitioners have made a complaint to the Commissioner for Co-operation dated 1.7.2011 and, therefore, prayed that a direction be given to the Commissioner to decide the same, in accordance with law, within the stipulated period. 3. The learned counsel for the respondent no.4 has submitted that the petitioners have approached this Court at the eleventh hour, at the same time, they have a remedy of an Election Petition and, therefore, prayed that if the Court is inclined to give direction to the Commissioner to decide the complaint of the petitioners, issue regarding alternate remedy of an Election Petition available to the aggrieved person may be kept open. 4. On the back-drop of the above referred facts, it appears that the petitioners have filed a complaint to the Commissioner for Co-operation dated 1.7.2011 against the procedure adopted by the respondent no.4 3 wp5682.11 while conducting the election of the respondent no.4 society, which is pending for decision, and, therefore, we dispose of the petition with a direction to the Commissioner for Co-operation to decide the complaint of the petitioners, in accordance with law and procedure applicable in this regard, on its own merits, within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of this order, by following the principles of natural justice. The issue regarding alternate remedy of an Election Petition available to the aggrieved party is kept open. Order accordingly. (D. D. SINHA, J.) (A.R. JOSHI, J.)