1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 8619 OF 2010 Jagannath s/o Bhagwanrao Shinde .. PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. D.J. Choudhary, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.J. Ghute Patil, AGP for the State. Mr. V.D. Sapkal, advocate for respondent no. 5. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 8620 OF 2010 Jagannath s/o Bhagwanrao Shinde .. PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. D.J. Choudhary, advocate for the petitioner. Smt. Y.M. Kshirsagar, AGP for the State. Mr. V.D. Sapkal, advocate for respondent no. 5. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 8621 OF 2010 Jagannath s/o Bhagwanrao Shinde .. PETITIONER 2 VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. D.J. Choudhary, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.J. Ghute Patil, AGP for the State. Mr. V.D. Sapkal, advocate for respondent no. 5. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 8622 OF 2010 Jagannath s/o Bhagwanrao Shinde .. PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. D.J. Choudhary, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.N. Jadhav, AGP for the State. Mr. V.D. Sapkal, advocate for respondent no. 5. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 8623 OF 2010 Jagannath s/o Bhagwanrao Shinde .. PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. D.J. Choudhary, advocate for the petitioner. 3 Smt. Y. M. Kshirsgar, AGP for the State. Mr. V.D. Sapkal, advocate for respondent no. 5. ===== CORAM : R. M. BORDE, J. DATE : 30 th SEPTEMBER, 2010. PER COURT : 1 The petitioner is aggrieved by acceptance of nomination paper of resps. by the Returning Officer. The elections to the Primary Agricultural Co- operative Society are scheduled to be held and the votes are to be recorded on 10-10-2010. All stages of the election including publication of final list of contesting candidates are complete. Acceptance of nomination papers of the respondents has been challenged on the ground that the concerned respondents are defaulters of respondent no. 4 – society. 2 It is contended that on the date of the scrutiny the amount recoverable has been paid by the concerned respondents and, recording this fact, the Returning Officer has directed acceptance of the nomination papers. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the reported judgment in the matter of Vijaysingh Krishnarao Parbat vs. Returning Officer reported in 2003(2) Mh.L.J. 485 and contended that it was incumbent upon the contesting candidate to clear off the dues until the last date of 4 presentation of the nomination paper and it was not permissible to pay the defaulted amount on the date of scrutiny. The petitioner also places reliance on the judgment in the matter of Dalsing s/o Shamsing Rajput vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 2006(3) Mh.L.J. 592 and contends that if the error in respect of acceptance of nomination paper can be corrected without disturbing the election process, the same shall be corrected by the High court on entertaining the petition. Learned counsel for the respondents has contested the factual aspects as regards the respondents being the defaulters of the society. It is contended that the petitioner has not demonstrated as to what is the due date of payment of amount. It is also contended that the certificate annexed to the petition is not worthy to be accepted. The bonafides of the officers of the co-operative society in issuing the certificate are also doubted. It is contended that the amount has been cleared off by way of precaution by the concerned respondents and there were no dues recoverable but the amount recoverable was the current dues. Taking into consideration these aspects, it is contended that the contention raised by the petitioner that the respondents are the defaulters of the primary society cannot be accepted or at any rate, the question raised in the petition is a disputed question which is required to be adjudicated by competent forum. Section 73FF of the Maharashtra Co- 5 operative Societies Act provides disqualification of membership in respect of defaulter of any society and the explanation to sub-section (1) of section 73FF of the Act lays down that in case of a primary agricultural credit society the member who defaults the payment of amount on the due date shall be termed as defaulter. 3 In the instant case, dispute is raised as regards the due date of payment. Considering the disputed nature of the question involved in the petition, in exercise of extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, no interference is called for in the petitions. It is also to be taken note of that the petitioner has efficacious alternate remedy of challenging the elections by presenting election dispute under section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act after completion of process of election. All the petitions stand rejected. 4 Pending civil application, if any, does not survive and stands disposed of. ( R. M. BORDE, J.) dyb/office/wp8619.10.odt