skc 1 WP-6447-11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6447 OF 2011 Shankar Ramchandra Thorat & Ors. ..Petitioners versus BEST Employees Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. S. A. Pawar for Petitioners. Mr. N. M. Bhadrashete for Respondent No. 1. Mrs. A. D. Vhatkar - Assistant Government Pleader for State - Respondent No. 3. CORAM : D. D. SINHA AND SMT. V. K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. 14 September 2011 P.C. : Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel for the respondent no. 1 and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the State - respondent no. 3. 2. In the present petition the petitioners are challenging the legality, validity and propriety of the election programme published by the election officer - respondent no.2 dated 25th March 2011 for holding election of the skc 2 WP-6447-11 managing committee of the respondent no.1 society. 3. The challenge raised by the petitioners is no more res integra and is covered by the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Shri Sant Sadguru Janardan Swami (Moingiri Maharaj) Sahakari Dughda Utpadak Sanstha and Anr. vs. State of Maharashtra [2002 (1) Mh.L.J. 659 as well as decision of this Court in the case of Prataprao Rangrao Patil in writ petition no. 3393 of 2003. This Court in decision dated 1st August 2011 in Writ Petition No. 4775 of 2011 [Ashok Vishnu Mudgal & Ors. vs. Shri Bhairavnath Sahakari Dudh Vyasavik Saunstha Maryadit & Ors.], in paragraph 7 has observed thus : “The law declared by the Apex Court as well as the Division Bench of this Court clearly demonstrate that once the voters list, provisional or otherwise, is declared, it become intergral part of the election process, and, therefore, no interference is warranted in the process of election. The counsel for the petitioners did not point out any other judgment taking view other than the one taken by the Apex Court in Shri Sant Sadguru Janardhan Swami (Moingiri Maharaj) Sahakari Dughda Utpadak Sanstha and Anr. vs. State of Maharashtra skc 3 WP-6447-11 and ors (2001) 8 SCC 509 or the decision of this Court in the case of Prataprao Rangrao Patil (cited supra).” 4. In view of the law declared on the subject by the Apex Court and this Court, the challenge in the present writ petition is not maintainable and the same is disposed of as such. (D. D. SINHA, J.) (SMT. V. K. TAHILRAMANI, J.)