The Bombay High Court dismissed writ petitions seeking to quash an interim stay order on electorates. The judge held the prayers infructuous as the underlying revision was disposed of in favor of the petitioners and the election tenure had expired.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.956 OF 2005 WITH 975 OF 2005
Shri. S.J. Yadav. ..Petitioner.
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra & ors. ..Respondent.
And
Shri.Anil Mumbaikar. ..Petitioner.
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra and ors.
..Respondent.
Mr. Vijay Patil for the Petitioners.
Dr. V.K. Choudhary for the Respondent Nos. 6 to 9.
CORAM : R.S.MOHITE, J.
DATED : 29/11/2005.
PC:
1. The petitioners have filed these petitions for
quashing and setting aside the interim stay dated
9.2.2005 and the letter dated 15.2.2005 issued by the
Co.operative Department reproducing the said order. It
is stated that the impugned order was granted in a
pending revision and admittedly the said revision has
been disposed of in favour of the petitioners. In the
circumstances, prayer (a) of the petitions have become
infructuous as the revision itself has been disposed of
finally. It appears that under the shelter of the said
order the petitioners were prevented from voting and the
election of Chairman and Vice Chairman of Respondent
No.6 was held on 17.2.2005. This is an independent
cause of action. The said order which was granted
pending revision was admittedly operative on the date of
election. I am not going into the merits as to whether
the stay granted in the said petition is proper or not.
In the circumstances, I am not inclined to allow the
prayer for setting aside the election of respondent Nos.
6 and 7. In any case, the tenure of the Chairman & Vice
Chairman i.e. respondent Nos. 8 and 9 was for the
period of one year and 8-months have already over.
Hence, both the petitions are dismissed.
(R.S. MOHITE, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an application for quashing the interim stay in an election proceeding is maintainable when the impugned order has already been disposed of finally.
Whether a petition can be entertained for setting aside the election where tenure of office has already expired.
Shri. S.J. Yadav
The State of Maharashtra
Shri. Anil Mumbaikar
R.S. MOHITE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court