Case Note & Summary
This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was filed before the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court challenging the order dated 12.08.2026 passed by the District Co-operative Election Officer and Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Amravati in Application No.256/2026. The dispute arose in the context of election to the board of directors of the Yavatmal District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. (respondent No.3). Respondent No.4, Ambadi Gram Vividh Karyakari Sahakari Sanstha Ltd., a member society of the bank, was to nominate a representative. The election programme provided for a provisional voter list published on 16.01.2026, objections from 21.07.2026 to 29.07.2026, decision on objections on 12.08.2026, and final voter list on 19.08.2026. A meeting of respondent No.4 society was called on 29.12.2025 but adjourned for want of quorum of seven members; it was held on 05.01.2026, where respondent No.5 was nominated. Since the secretary did not forward the proposal, the provisional voter list showed no proposal for respondent No.4. Respondent No.5 filed Application No.250/2026 and the petitioner filed Application No.256/2026. The Election Officer rejected the petitioner's application and confirmed respondent No.5's name. The petitioner challenged this by writ petition. The court heard Mr. P.A. Kadu for the petitioner, Mr. C.A. Lokhande, AGP for the State, and Mr. Amol Patil along with Mr. Raunak Kurani for respondent Nos. 4 and 5. The petitioner argued that as per bye-law No.5, a quorum of seven members was required; in an adjourned meeting no quorum was required but any resolution passed had to be ratified in the next meeting. Since ratification never happened, the nomination of respondent No.5 was invalid and the Election Officer's order was illegal. The petitioner also relied on a communication dated 28.11.2025 requiring nomination per bye-laws before 31.12.2025. Respondents 4 and 5 raised preliminary objections: the petitioner had no locus standi under Rule 11 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies (Election to Committee) Rules, 2014; a statutory remedy of election petition existed; the petitioner did not challenge the order in Application No.250/2026; and the election process had commenced. On merits, respondents argued that notices of meetings dated 29.12.2025, 05.01.2026, 12.01.2026 and 24.01.2026 were duly served on the petitioner, who deliberately remained absent to prevent quorum, so he should be non-suited. In rejoinder, the petitioner submitted that his name was never in the provisional voter list and therefore the Election Officer had no jurisdiction to include his name in the final voter list. The court reproduced Rule 11 and noted that under sub-rule (1), only any member of the society concerned who is a voter or a representative authorised to vote on behalf of such society may bring omissions or errors to the notice of the Election Officer. It observed that the words 'society concerned' would entail the society in respect of which the election is to be held, i.e., respondent No.3 bank. The supplied excerpt ends after this observation, and no final operative order is included. Therefore, the final decision on maintainability and merits cannot be stated from the provided text.
Headnote
A) Co-operative Election Law - Locus Standi to Object to Provisional Voter List - Rule 11 of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies (Election to Committee) Rules, 2014 - The court examined whether the petitioner, whose name was not in the provisional voter list, could object to inclusion of respondent No.5; Rule 11 permits only any member of the society concerned who is a voter or any representative authorised to vote to bring omission or error to notice; the court observed that the words 'society concerned' would entail the society in respect of which the election is to be held, i.e., respondent No.3 bank; however, no final holding on locus appears in the excerpt. Held that locus under Rule 11 was the threshold issue but the excerpt ends before final determination (Paras 7, 11-12). B) Co-operative Election Law - Alternative Statutory Remedy and Commencement of Election Process - Bar to Interference - Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 / Maharashtra Co-operative Societies (Election to Committee) Rules, 2014 - Respondents raised preliminary objections that statutory remedy of election petition was available and election process had commenced; the petitioner did not challenge the order in Application No.250/2026; the court was addressing these objections but no final ruling appears in the provided excerpt. Held that these objections were presented but not resolved in the text supplied (Paras 7, 10). C) Co-operative Society Bye-Laws - Validity of Nomination of Representative - Quorum and Ratification Requirement - Bye-law No.5 of Respondent No.4 Society - Petitioner contended that the resolution nominating respondent No.5 was passed in an adjourned meeting without requisite quorum and never ratified in a subsequent meeting, so respondent No.1's confirmation was de hors the bye-laws; respondent No.1 apparently held ratification unnecessary; the court heard these contentions but did not decide merits in the excerpt. Held that validity of nomination depends on bye-laws but no final determination available (Paras 5-6, 8-9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order dated 12.08.2026 passed by respondent No.1 in Application No.256/2026, confirming the name of respondent No.5 in the voter list, is illegal; whether the petitioner has locus standi under Rule 11 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies (Election to Committee) Rules, 2014; whether the writ petition is barred by alternative remedy of election petition and commencement of election process; whether the nomination of respondent No.5 was valid under bye-law No.5 requiring quorum and subsequent ratification.
Law Points
- Rule 11 of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies (Election to Committee) Rules
- 2014 permits only a member of the society concerned who is a voter or a representative authorised to vote to object to the provisional voter list
- the words 'society concerned' mean the society in respect of which the election is to be held
- bye-laws of a member society require quorum and ratification for nomination of a representative
- statutory remedy of election petition bars interference after election process commences.
