Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shri Somnath Kondaji Korde, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court challenging the election of the managing committee of Samata Samaj Vikas Sanstha and others (Respondent Nos. 1 to 4). The petitioner contended that the election was conducted in an illegal and irregular manner. The respondents, represented by their advocates, raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition, arguing that the dispute regarding the validity of the election falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Co-operative Court under Section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (MCS Act). The Court heard the submissions of all parties. The Court analyzed the provisions of Section 91 of the MCS Act, which provides for adjudication of disputes touching the constitution, management, or business of a society by the Co-operative Court. The Court held that the election dispute raised by the petitioner squarely falls within the ambit of Section 91, and therefore, the petitioner ought to have approached the Co-operative Court instead of filing a writ petition. The Court dismissed the writ petition as not maintainable, leaving it open to the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy before the appropriate forum in accordance with law. The Court did not express any opinion on the merits of the case.
Headnote
A) Co-operative Law - Election Dispute - Maintainability of Writ Petition - Section 91 Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 - The petitioner challenged the election of the managing committee of a society by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The Court held that the dispute regarding the validity of the election falls within the purview of Section 91 of the MCS Act, which provides for adjudication by the Co-operative Court. The writ petition was dismissed as not maintainable in view of the alternative remedy available to the petitioner. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is maintainable to challenge the election of the managing committee of a society registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, when an alternative remedy is available under Section 91 of the said Act.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable. The petitioner is at liberty to avail the alternative remedy before the appropriate forum in accordance with law. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Election disputes under Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act must be adjudicated by Co-operative Court under Section 91
- not by High Court under Article 226
- Alternative remedy bar
- Maintainability of writ petition
Case Details
2025 LawText (BOM) (10) 10
Writ Petition No. 1444 of 2020
Mr. Amitkumar Damodar Sale, Advocate for Petitioner; Ms. Pranita Hingmire, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and 2; Mr. Subhash V. Gutte, Advocate for Respondent No.3; Mr. Sahil A. Pandire, Advocate for Respondent No.4
Shri. Somnath Kondaji Korde
Samata Samaj Vikas Sanstha and Ors
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the election of the managing committee of a society registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought to challenge the validity of the election of the managing committee of the respondent society.
Filing Reason
The petitioner alleged that the election of the managing committee was conducted in an illegal and irregular manner.
Issues
Whether a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is maintainable to challenge the election of the managing committee of a society registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, when an alternative remedy is available under Section 91 of the said Act.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner argued that the election was conducted illegally and irregularly.
The respondents raised a preliminary objection that the dispute regarding the validity of the election falls within the purview of Section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, and therefore the writ petition is not maintainable.
Ratio Decidendi
A dispute regarding the validity of an election of the managing committee of a society registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, falls within the ambit of Section 91 of the said Act, which provides for adjudication by the Co-operative Court. Therefore, a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is not maintainable in view of the alternative remedy available to the petitioner.
Judgment Excerpts
Heard Mr. Sale, learned Advocate for Petitioner, Ms. Hingmire, learned Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and 2, Mr. Gutte, learned Advocate for Respondent No.3 and Mr. Pandire, learned Advocate for Respondent No.4.
The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the election of the Managing Committee of the Respondent No.1 Society.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 1444 of 2020 before the Bombay High Court challenging the election of the managing committee of the respondent society. The respondents raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability. The Court heard the matter and dismissed the petition on 07-10-2025.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960: Section 91
- Constitution of India: Article 226
