JUDGMENT
Ar. Lakshmanan, C.J.
1. Heard
all the parties.
2. This appeal is directed against an interlocutory order passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in WVMP No.3079 of 2001 in WPMP No.16998 of 2001 in WP No. 13627 of 2001. Pending the writ petition, the above WPMP was filed to suspend operation of the proceedings in RC 846 of 2001 – Election, dated 22-6-2001
of the District Collector (Co-operation) Hyderabad Urban District, the Election Authority notifying the elections to be held on 27-7-2001 for the post of President and Managing Committee Member of the Bhagyalakshmi Co-operative Housing Society Limited, TAB 76, Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad and by order dated 6-7-2001, interim suspension was granted. However, learned single Judge after following the judgment reported in SSSJS (M.M.) SOU Sanstha v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2001 SCW 3959, vacated the interim suspension granted by this Court on 6-7-2001. The learned Judge has followed the judgment referred to above which held that the writ petition to stay the election of the Managing Committee of a Society is not maintainable when the election process has been set in motion.
3. We agree with the view taken by the learned single Judge. Another Division Bench of Rajasthan High Court in the judgment reported in O.P. Gupta v. Union of India and Ors., 2000 1 LLJ 831, dismissed a Special Appeal wherein a similar question was raised following the very recent pronouncement of the Supreme Court which has interpreted the term “election” to include all steps and entire proceedings commencing from the date of notification of the election till the date of declaration of result and held that no election to either House of Parliament or to the House or either House of the Legislature of a State shall be called in question except by an election petition presented by such authority and in such manner as may be provided for by or under any law made by the appropriate Legislature. The Supreme Court has pointed out that if an election is to be called in question and which questioning may have the effect of interrupting, obstructing or protracting the election proceedings in any manner, the invoking of judicial remedy by writ petition has to be postponed till after the completing of proceedings in an election. The Apex Court has further observed that
any decision sought and rendered will not amount to calling in question an election if it subserves the progress of the election and facilitate the completion of the election and anything done towards completing or in furtherance of the election proceedings cannot be described as questioning the election.
4. In view of the above discussion the appeal fails and is dismissed. We, however, request the learned single Judge to take up the writ petition for hearing on priority basis. The learned Counsel for the petitioner is at liberty to mention before the learned single Judge for fixing an early date for hearing of the writ petition.