1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 8634 OF 2009 Tejrao S/o Uttamrao Divekar .. .. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra and others .. .. Respondents Shri S. S. Choudhari, Advocate for the Petitioner. Smt. V. A. Shinde, Advocate for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 6. Shri D. R. Kale, Advocate for the Respondent No. 7. CORAM : A. P. DESHPANDE & N. D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 27TH JANUARY, 2010. ORAL ORDER [ PER A. P. DESHPANDE, J. ] : 1. This petition is filed by sole petitioner who is member of a sugar factory voicing the grievance in a representative capacity for and on behalf of himself and 1028 other persons. Earlier election of the Managing Committee of Sugar Factory was held in 2005. The names of the present petitioner and other 1028 persons on whose behalf the petitioner claims to have filed this petition were deleted from the list of voters by an order passed by the Collector on the ground that they were not validly enrolled as members and were not eligible for being so enrolled. Despite of adverse order passed by 2 Collector at the time of holding of last election, the petitioner has chosen not to question the legality of the said order by filing dispute or otherwise. Hence the said order had attended finality. This time, the name of the petitioner is not borne in the provisional list of voters. In the facts of the present case, we refuse to entertain this petition in the representative capacity and hence the petition is being disposed of considering the right of the present petitioner alone. 02. Perusal of Rule 6 of the Maharashtra Specified Co- operative Societies Election Rules 1971, reveals that even after publication of the final list of voters, the Collector is empowered to decide the objection in regard to inclusion or exclusion of name of any voter, if the claim is justified. In that view of the matter, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to approach the Collector under Rule 6(V) of the Rules by making appropriate representation. In the event if such a representation is made, we have no iota of doubt that the Collector would decide the same in accordance with law. The writ petition is thus disposed of. [ N. D. DESHPANDE, J.] [ A. P. DESHPANDE, J.] bsb/Jan. 2010