Bombay High CourtWP/4244/2015rejected at admission stage

Shilatai Ajeetrao Patil Rajurkar v. State Of Maharashtra And Others

2015-04-24Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sunil P. Deshmukh2 pages

1 W.P.4244.15

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4244 OF 2015 Shilatai Ajeetrao Patil Rajurkar ...PETITIONER versus State of Maharashtra and ors ...RESPONDENTS .....

Mr. N.P. Patil, Jamalpurkar, Advocate for Petitioner Mr. V.G. Shelke, A.G.P. For respondents No. 1 to 3. Mr. A.N. Irpatgire, Advocate for respondent No. 4 .....

with CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4780 OF 2015 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 4244 OF 2015 The Latur District Central Co-op Bank Ltd. Latur ...APPLICANT versus State of Maharashtra and ors ...RESPONDENTS .....

Mr. D.J. Choudhary, Advocate for applicant Mr. V.G. Shelke, A.G.P. For respondents No. 1 to 3. Mr. A.N. Irpatgire, Advocate for respondent No. 4 Mr. N.P. Patil, Jamalpurkar, Advocate for respondent No. 5 .....

CORAM : SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.

DATED : 24th APRIL, 2015 Order :- 1.

Petition raises disputed questions of facts. According to the petitioner, respondent No. 4 happens to be office bearer of Belsangvi Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Sanstha, Tq. Jalkot, District Latur. For said purpose, he relies on the list of board of directors dated 31-03-2014 annexed to the writ petition at page No. 22 containing name of

2 W.P.4244.15 respondent No. 4. Whereas, it is the case of respondent No. 4 that he had resigned from the managing committee way-back in November-2014. Since then he had not been on the board of directors of said society.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that resolution was passed by the board of directors of said society nominating respondent No. 4 as representative on their behalf for participating in elections of federal society.

Although Mr. Patil contends that all these aspects had not been brought before the election officer, contention of respondent No. 4 is all these aspects had been submitted and argued before the learned election officer. In such a disputed position, I am not inclined to entertain writ petition.

Writ petition, as such, stands rejected. However, it would be open for the petitioner to take up appropriate proceedings at proper stage including an election petition.

In view of disposal of writ petition nothing further survives for consideration in civil application No. 4780 of 2015 and the same stands disposed of accordingly.

( SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J. ) MTK