Bombay High Court
Sanjay Ramkrushna Saundale vs District Election Officer And ... on 20 September, 2022
Bench: Manish Pitale
1 929-3992-22
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 3992 OF 2022
Sanjay Ramkrushna Saundale -- Petitioner
Vs.
District Election Officer and District Deputy -- Respondents
Registrar Co-operative Societies, Yavatmal &
others
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders of directions
and Registrar's orders
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Gaurav C. Khond, Advocate for Petitioner
Mrs M.A. Barabde, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2
Mr. S.K. Tambde, Advocate for Respondent No.3
CORAM : MANISH PITALE, J.
DATE : 20th SEPTEMBER, 2022
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. By the present petition, the petitioner has challenged
order dated 04/07/2022, whereby objection raised to voters
list on behalf of the petitioner was rejected, effectively holding
that the non-inclusion of the name of the petitioner in the
voters list was justified.
3. This Court issued notice in the present petition,
wherein contesting respondent No.3 has entered appearance
through counsel. The reply is placed on record.
MP Deshpande
2 929-3992-22
4. A preliminary objection is raised as regards the
maintainability of the writ petition by placing reliance on the
Division Bench judgment of this case in the case of Pandurang
Laxman Kadam Vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported
in 2016(6) Bom.C.R. 75 and order dated 12/07/2022, passed
by this Court in Writ Petition No. 3619/2022 (The Taluka
Sahakri Shetkari Kharedi Vikri Samiti Maryadit & Anr. Vs.
Government of Maharashtra & Anr.). By placing reliance on
the aforesaid judgments and orders, it was submitted that the
nature of dispute sought to be raised on behalf of the
petitioner necessarily involves disputed questions of facts and
that the present writ petition is not maintainable. It is brought
to the notice of this Court that in such cases liberty was
reserved for the aggrieved party to file a dispute by invoking
Section 19 of the Maharashtra Cooper Societies Act, 1960.
5. This Court has taken into consideration the nature of
grievance raised on behalf of the petitioner and it pertains to
non-inclusion of name in voters list, thereby showing that it
pertains to finalization of electoral roll. In the case of
Pandurang Laxman Kadam Vs. State of Maharashtra (supra),
the Division Bench of this Court in an exhaustive judgment,
held that once election process is set in motion, which includes
various details pertaining to electoral roll, ballot papers,
nomination papers, etc., any dispute that may be raised by an
aggrieved party has to be raised before the appropriate
authority under Section 91 of the said Act and that such a
MP Deshpande
3 929-3992-22
remedy cannot be said to be an inefficacious remedy for this
Court to exercise writ jurisdiction.
6. This Court is of the opinion that there is substance in
the contentions raised on behalf of respondent No.3 and that,
therefore, the present writ petition deserves to be dismissed on
that ground. The petitioner would always be at liberty to
approach the appropriate authority under Section 91 of the
said Act, if at all he is competent to avail of such remedy in
accordance with law.
7. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed with
liberty to the petitioner to invoke the aforesaid remedy, if at all
available to the petitioner in the facts and circumstances of the
case. If the petitioner chooses to avail of such remedy, it will
be decided strictly in accordance with law.
JUDGE
Digitally signed by:MILIND
P DESHPANDE
Signing Date:21.09.2022
18:45
MP Deshpande
