Bombay High Court
Shri. Mahadev Appasaheb Thorat vs The State Of Maharashtra Thru The ... on 10 January, 2024
Author: Amit Borkar
Bench: Amit Borkar
2024:BHC-AS:1008
902-wp-329-2024.doc
SA Pathan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.329 OF 2024
Mahadev Appasaheb Thorat ... Petitioner
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra
Through The Secretary,
Dept. of Cooperation Marketing &
Textiles & Ors ... Respondents
Mr. Ketan Joshi a/w Mr. Vishwajeet Mohite, for
Petitioner.
Mrs. M. S. Srivastava, AGP for State/Respondent.
CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J.
DATED : JANUARY 10, 2024
P.C.:
1. The petitioner is the person who filed his nomination to the
managing committee of cooperative society registered under the
provisions of Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act,1960.
2. The petitioner's nomination was objected on the ground that
the petitioner's proposer was defaulter within the meaning of
Section 73-CA of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act,1960.
3. The Returning Officer accepted the objection and rejected
the petitioner's nomination.
4. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed an appeal under
902-wp-329-2024.doc
Section 152-A of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960.
The Appellate Authority by the impugned order dated 29
December 2023 dismissed the appeal.
5. The petitioner, therefore, challenged the order passed by the
Appellate Authority by way of present writ petition.
6. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the
proposer cured disqualification before the date of scrutiny of
depositing entire amount with the concerned cooperative society,
the receipt evidencing such a payment was produced before the
Returning Officer. However, the Returning Officer rejected the
nomination and, therefore, interference under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India is called for.
7. The order passed by the Returning Officer rejecting
nomination has subject to appeal under Section 152A of the
Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. The Single Judge of
this Court in the case of Vijaysingh Krishnarao Parbat vs Returning
Officer, Janata, reported in 2003 (2) Mh.L.J. 485 has held that in
an appeal challenging rejection of nomination all contesting
candidates are required to be made party. This Court followed the
judgment of Division Bench of this Court. Even after the judgment
in the case of Vijaysingh (Supra) the said view is consistently
followed in several Single Bench judgments of this Court.
8. On perusal of the appeal memo, it appears that save and
except the society and the complainant, no other candidate was
made party to the appeal. Hence, the appeal is not maintainable. If
the appeal is not maintainable, the petitioner cannot challenge the
902-wp-329-2024.doc
validity of order rejecting nomination paper in this Court. Even in
this writ petition, the contesting parties are not made parties.
9. Even otherwise, the election/voting of the society is
scheduled to take place on 14 January 2024. The Apex Court in
the case of Shri Sant Sadguru Janardan Swami Vs. State of
Maharashtra & Ors, reported in (2001) 8 SCC 509 has held that
the consistent view taken by the Bombay High Court is that even
in case of election of cooperative society, after starting of election
process, the High Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India shall be loath to interfere. The interference,
at this stage when the list of validly nominated candidates is
published, is not called for. Therefore, proper remedy for the
petitioner is to challenge the rejection of nomination by way of
filing the election petition under Section 91 of the Maharashtra
Cooperative Societies Act, 1960.
10. By keeping remedy of petitioner to be agitated, the writ
petition is dismissed. No costs.
(AMIT BORKAR, J.)
