Prabhat Matasyapalan Sahakari Sanstha Ltd. Gondai, Thr. Smt. Pooja W/O Sanjay Bisen And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra, Department Of Co-Operation, Thr. Secretary, Mumbai And Others

1 wp920.17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 920/2017 Prabhat Matasyapalan Sahakari Sanstha ltd. & ors. ..VS..

State of Maharashtra & ors.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri V.R. Borkar, Advocate for the petitioner(s) Shri S.A. Ashirgade, Addl. GP for the respondent nos. 1 to 5 CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.

DATED : 29/01/2019 Heard Shri V.R. Borkar, Advocate for the petitioners and Shri S.A. Ashirgade, Addl. GP for the respondent nos. 1 to 5.

By this petition, the petitioners have challenged the order passed by the respondent no. 3 - Returning Officer directing exclusion of their names from the list of voters. The learned advocate for the petitioners and the learned Addl. GP have pointed out that the elections of the respondent no. 6 - Bank are stayed by the Division Bench of this Court while considering the writ petitions which are pending. The learned Addl. GP has submitted that the elections are delayed by more than a year and the entitlement/eligibility of the petitioners to participate in the elections which may be held after further orders are passed by the Division Bench, will have to be considered. It is submitted that there is every chance that for the elections, fresh process may be conducted. It is submitted that in these facts, nothing survives in the petition.

2 wp920.17 The learned advocate for the petitioners has submitted that if fresh process is not conducted for the elections, and the process is continued from the same stage, the impugned order may adversely affect the petitioners right to participate in the elections.

In the facts of the case, in my view, the following order would sub-serve the ends of justice:- (a) Accepting the submission made by the learned Addl. GP, the writ petition is disposed as infructuous.

(b) However, if the impugned order affects the right of the petitioners to participate in the election, the petitioners will be at liberty to revive this writ petition after serving the copy of the application on the advocates representing the respondents.

(c) In the circumstances, the parties to bear their own costs.

JUDGE Ansari