Anil Daulatrao Borse v. The State Co Operative Election Authority And Others

2026:BHC-AUG:22019 924-WP-5446-2026.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5446 OF 2026 Anil Daulatrao Borse

VERSUS

The State Co Operative Election Authority And Others ...

Mr. K. J. Suryawanshi h/f Mr. A. K. Shingare, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. V. H. Dighe, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 Mr. G. P. Darandale, Advocate for Respondent No.3 Mr. P. B. Shirsath, Advocate for Respondent No. 4 *** CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J (VACATION COURT) DATE : MAY 28, 2026 PC :

1.

The Petitioner impugns order dated 18-05-2026 passed by Respondent No. 2, rejecting Petitioner's objection for inclusion of name of Respondent No. 4 in voters list of Respondent No. 3 - Aurangabad District Central Co-operative Bank (for short 'ADCC Bank').

2.

The election of Board of Directors of Respondent No. 3, ADCC bank, were due in month of March, 2026. On 11.03.2026, Respondent No. 2 District Election Officer, issued a notification inviting member societies to submit resolution of its representative for preparation of provisional voters list. The Respondent No. 5 society passed resolution nominating name of its representative. On 27.04.2026, provisional voters list was published. The name of Respondent No. 4 was included as representative of Respondent No. 5 Society. The Petitioner had raised objection before Respondent No. 2 regarding inclusion of name of Respondent No. 4 in

924-WP-5446-2026.odt voters list. Respondent No. 2 rejected vide impugned order. Hence, this Petition. 3.

Heard learned Advocates appearing for respective parties. Perusal of impugned order shows that Petitioner's objection is rejected firstly on ground that he has no locus standi to raise objection to provisional voters list. Secondly, Respondent No. 5 is not shown to have gone under liquidation as claimed by Petitioner. Apparently, reasons recorded by Respondent No. 2 are in tune with factual backdrop of matter and legal position.

4.

The Petitioner claims to be representative of National Vidyut Yantriki Labour Contractor Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. However, nothing is brought on record to show that Petitioner is either member or representative of said society or said society is member of Respondent No. 3 ADCC Bank. Even in present Petition, Petitioner has not clarified his locus to file objection in terms of Rule 11 of Election Rules of 2014, which contemplates that objection can be entertained at behest of member of ADCC Bank or representative of member society of Bank. In absence of necessary particulars depicting locus of Petitioner, Respondent No. 2 is justified in refusing to entertain Petitioner's objection. Even otherwise, Petitioner had failed to bring on record documentary evidence in support of his contention that Respondent No. 5 society has gone under liquidation or lost right to participate in election of ADCC Bank.

5.

In result, Writ Petition sans merit. Hence, Writ Petition stands dismissed (S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.) Umesh