Petitioner challenged inclusion of 100 voters in the provisional list on grounds of non-observance of society by-laws. The court held the returning officer lacks jurisdiction to scrutinize society resolutions and the objection is not substantive, thus rejecting the writ petition.
Writ petition stands rejected.
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.
wp 1510.15.odt
{1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.1510 OF 2015
Vithal S/o Shrirang Kothule & another
Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and others
Respondents
Mr.N.B.Narwade advocate for the petitioners Mr.S.S.Tope, GP for Respondent State
CORAM : R.M. BORDE & P.R. BORA, JJ Dated : 9th February, 2015.
PER COURT :-
1 The petitioner raised an objection, as regards incorporating the names of about 100 members, in the provisional list of voters, published by the returning officer on 9.1.2015. The petitioner contends that, about 100 voters who are inducted as members of the Society by adopting a resolution in the year 2011 do not possess land and as they do not fulfill eligibility criteria prescribed under by laws, they are not entitled to be enrolled as members of primary society.
2 It is not a matter of dispute that, about 100 persons are inducted as members in the year 2011 and the petitioner has raised objection to the returning officer in respect of their
{2} wp 1510.15.odt
enrollment as members, on the ground of non-observance of by laws of the society. There is neither challenge raised to the membership of such members before the competent authority, nor to the resolution passed by the society accepting application for membership has been challenged, before competent forum.
3 It would be beyond the purview of the authority of the returning officer to scrutinize the legality or otherwise of the resolution/decision of society granting membership.
4 The petitioner contends that, he has not been granted opportunity of hearing by the returning officer, before taking any decision in respect of his objection. Even on consideration of the merits of objection raised by the petitioner before the returning officer, we are of the considered view that, the objection is not of such a nature, which can be considered by the returning officer. It would not be prudent to cause any interference in on-going process of election.
5 Writ petition is devoid of substance and hence stands rejected.
(P.R. BORA, J) (R.M.BORDE, J)
vbd
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the returning officer has jurisdiction to scrutinize the legality of society resolutions granting membership to voters.
Whether the petitioner was granted an opportunity of hearing before the objection to voter enrollment was rejected.
Whether a writ petition challenging voter enrollment based on society by-laws is maintainable during the election process.
Vithal S/o Shrirang Kothule & another
The State of Maharashtra and others
R.M. Borde
P.R. Bora
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
