1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4255 OF 2010 Dattatraya Chhattusa Kalpavruksha ..Petitioner Vs. Solapur Janata Sahakari Bank Limited, Solapur ..Respondent ......... Mr.N.J.Patil, for Petitioner Mr.A.I.Patel, AGP for respondent No.3 – State. ......... CORAM: R.G.KETKAR, J. (VACATION COURT) DATE : 26th MAY, 2010. P.C. : This petition challenges the order dated 13 th May, 2010 passed by the respondent No.2 - Returning Officer, Solapur Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd., Solapur. 2] Heard Mr.Patil, learned counsel for petitioner and Mr.A.I.Patel, learned AGP for respondent No.3 - State. 3] Mr.Patil submitted that on 12 th May, 2010, the respondent No.2 allotted symbols to all the contesting candidates at about 4:00 pm. After the last date of withdrawal of the nomination papers i.e. on 11 th May, 2010, the respondent No.8 applied for grant of common symbol for their panel. The said application was filed on 12 th May, 2010 after the allotment of symbols to all the candidates. It is 4255-10.sxw 2 submitted that on 13 th May, 2010, respondent No.9 also filed an application to the Respondent No.2 for allotment of common symbols for their panel. Thereafter, on 13 th May, 2010, the second respondent allowed the said applications for allotment of common symbols by setting his earlier order dated 12 th May, 2010. Mr.Patil submits that this is violation of the provisions of the Maharashtra Co- operative Societies Act, 1961. He submits that once the Returning Officer allotted symbols to all the candidates, the same is final and cannot be changed subsequently. He further submitted that the Returning Officer, while passing the impugned order dated 13 th May, 2010, did not properly consider the order dated 12 th May, 2010 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.4159 of 2010. Finally he submitted that though he has served all the contesting respondents, nobody has appeared. 4] It is not in dispute that the elections are to take place tomorrow i.e. on 27 th May, 2010. If at this stage any interim order is passed, that is bound to upset the elections process. In my opinion, this is not a fit case to exercise the powers under the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In view of this, the petition deserves to be dismissed. 5] Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed. It is further made clear that all the contentions raised by the petitioner are expressly kept open for agitating before the appropriate forum after the result of the elections are declared. [R.G. KETKAR, J.] 4255-10.sxw