Dismissed

Ashok Dashrath Sarpate v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC11 Feb 2022WP/1741/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court at Aurangabad dismissed two writ petitions challenging a cooperative society election objection. The Court held that since an alternate efficacious remedy exists under Section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act read with Rule 78, the writ petitions were not entertained.

What did the court decide?

Writ petitions dismissed with liberty to avail alternate remedy under Section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act read with Rule 78.

Ashok Dashrath Sarpate Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others — Election Law | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

919-WP-1741-22.odt

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.1741 OF 2022

¶5

ASHOK DASHRATH SARPATE VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶7

Advocate for Petitioner : Ms. Pradnya Talekar h/f. Talekar And Associates AGP for Respondent No.1-State : Mrs. V. S. Choudhari Advocate for Respondents No.2 to 4 : Mr. S. K. Kadam

¶8

… AND WRIT PETITION NO.1974 OF 2022

¶9

JANARDAN RAMRAO JADHAV VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶10

Advocate for Petitioner : Ms. Pradnya Talekar h/f.

¶11

Talekar And Associates AGP for Respondent No.1-State : Mr. S. N. Kendre Advocate for Respondents No. 2 to 4 : Mr. S. K. Kadam

¶12

PER COURT :-

¶13

The petitioners are aggrieved by the rejection of their objection taken to the candidature of respondent No.5 for contesting the election of Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit, Kinhola, Taluka Vasamat, District Hingoli. Returning Officer has rejected the objection on the ground that no document supporting to their claims are placed on record.

¶14

2 919-WP-1741-22.odt

¶15

Mr. Kadam, learned Advocate for respondents no. 2 to 4, by placing reliance on the decision of this Court at principal seat, in Writ Petition no. 5878 of 2021 (Dattatraya Genaba Lole and Others Versus The Divisional Joint Registrar Co-operative Societies, Pune and Others) submitted that, since the petitioners have alternate efficacious remedy, hence, these petitions may not be entertained.

¶16

The Division Bench of this Court in the said decision has held that the petitioners have alternate efficacious remedy of filing proceedings under Section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act read with Rule 78 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules.

¶17

In that view of the matter, the Writ petitions are dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to avail alternate remedy. All the contentions of the petitioners are kept open.

¶18

( NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI ) JUDGE

¶19

rrd

Ashok Dashrath Sarpate v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Dashrath Sarpate v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vimalbai Bajirao Chaudhari Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Kanchan Nagar Co. Operative Housing Society Ltd. Nakshatrawadi through Its Chairman Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Balaji Vilasrao Shinde and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Janardan Ramrao Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sangita Shivaji Gaikwad Vs Rajabhu Laxman Gore and Another

Syed Husnuddin @ Syed Iqbal Died Lrs Afsha Begum Late Syed Husnuddin and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others