Allowed

Shri. Purushottam Ramraje Jagtap and Anr. v. Maharashtra State Co-Operative Election Tribunal and Anr.

Bombay HC2 Mar 2015WP/1715/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged orders mandating a fresh election for the Chairman of a cooperative Karkhana due to amendments in the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. The Court held that the previous election was illegal under amended provisions and directed the Ex-parte quashing of impugned communications and holding a fresh election within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

The impugned communications dated 5th and 11th February 2015 were quashed; Respondents directed to declare previous election illegal and hold fresh election within four weeks.

Shri. Purushottam Ramraje Jagtap and Anr. Vs Maharashtra State… — Election Law | Bombay HC (2015)

wp.1715-2015

Dond

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.1715 OF 2015

¶6

Shri Purushottam Ramraje Jagtap & Anr. ..Petitioners. Vs. Maharashtra State Co-operative Election Tribunal & Anr. ..Respondents

¶7

Mr. A.V. Anturkar, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. S.B. Deshmukh and Sandeep Pathak for Petitioners.

¶8

Mr. P.G. Sawant,AGP for Respondent-State.

¶9

CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL & A.S. GADKARI, JJ.

¶10

DATE : 2^nd March 2015.

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of the parties.

¶13

2 It is contended that the Petitioner No.1 was elected as a

¶14

Chairman of the Managing Committee of the Petitioner No.2-Karkhana, after the earlier Chairman Shri Rajvardhan Shinde resigned on 8^th

¶15

November 2013. It is contended by the Petitioner No.1 that he was elected

¶16

by the Managing Committee Members of the Petitioner No.2-Karkhana. By

¶17

the communication dated 30^th January 2015, the Managing Director of the Petitioner No.2 to the State Co-operative Election Authorities requested to

¶18

¶19

wp.1715-2015

¶20

hold a fresh election in view of the amendments brought to the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act and the Rules framed thereunder. Accordingly, the Respondent No.2-the Regional Deputy Director (Sugar) on the orders passed by the Election Authorities, by communication dated 11^th February 2015 informed the Managing Director of the Petitioner No.2Karkhana to hold a fresh election to the post of Chairman on 20^th February 2015.

¶21

3 Being aggrieved by the said communication, the Petitioner No.1 approached this Court. By an order dated 18^th February 2015, we issued notices to the Respondents and by way of ad-interim relief, we directed the effect and operation of communication dated 11^th February 2015 be stayed.

¶22

4 The State has filed affidavit-in-reply through Shri Pandurang Abhimanyu Sathe, the Regional Deputy Director (Sugar), Pune. The learned Counsel for the Petitioners submits that necessary directions are issued to the Respondent-Election Authorities to declare election of the the Chairman of the Petitioner No.2, illegal and hold fresh election to the post of Chairman of the Petitioner No.2- Karkhana as per the provisions of Section 73-CB of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act .

¶23

¶24

wp.1715-2015

¶25

5 We have considered the submissions advanced before us. In

¶26

view of the amended provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, the Election Authority has been constituted to elect the Chairman of the Petitioner No.2-Someshwar Sahakaari Sakhaar Karkhana Ltd. The Respondents are directed to take appropriate steps to declare the election of the Chairman of Petitioner No.2-Someshwar Sahakaari Sakhaar Karkhana Ltd., as illegal and set out the programme of election of the Chairman within stipulated time. This exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks in accordance with amended provisions of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act.

¶27

6 In the facts of the case, the impugned communications dated 5^th February 2015 and 11^th February 2015 are quashed and set aside.

¶28

7 We do not express any opinion on the consequences of the Authorities taking decision in accordance with the amended provisions of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act.

¶29

8 Rule is made partly absolute.

¶30

(A.S. GADKARI, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL, J.)

¶31

¶32

wp.1715-2015

Shri. Purushottam Ramraje Jagtap and Anr. v. Maharashtra State Co-Operative Election Tribunal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Purushottam Ramraje Jagtap and Anr. v. Maharashtra State Co-Operative Election Tribunal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Commissioner of Police, Greater Mumbai and Anr. Vs Miss. Sonali Sakharam Chaugule

Ms. Julekha Dawood Mutwalli and Anr. Vs Mr. Rajendra Mangrulkar, Secretary M.P.S.C. and Anr.

Ms. Julekha Dawood Mutwalli and Anr. Vs Mr. Rajendra Mangrulkar, Secretary M.P.S.C. and Anr.

Shri. Satish Shivajirao Kakade Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Principal Secretary and Ors.

Bibishan Ganpati Burgute Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Egs and Water Conservation and Ors.

Mr. Vilas Kisanrao Isal Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Principal / Secretary, General Administration Dept and Ors.