1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.6930 OF 2008
1. Shri Dilip Laxman Girme Petitioner
vs.
1. Shri Bharat Prabhakar Pise & ors. Respondents
Mr.P.S.Dani for the petitioner.
Mr.A.P. Kulkarni for respondent no.1.
Mr.S.P.Nikam, for respondent no.2.
ig CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.
DATED : 2nd April, 2009
P.C.
The present writ petition is against the
interlocutory order dated 06.08.2008 passed by the
learned Additional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune in
the pending Election Petition No.PUNE/6/2007, whereby
accepting the preliminary objection regarding the
non-joinder of necessary parties as raised by the
petitioner (original respondent no.1) is upheld.
However, to meet ends of justice directed to join all
the returned candidates from the six gats of the
Karkhana as party respondent and also the Malegaon
Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., Shivnagar as a party
respondent to the present petition.
2. Respondents 1 and 2 have challenged the election
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 14:29:21 :::
2
petition under Section 144-T of the Maharashtra
Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (for short, “the Act”).
The petitioner is elected from one Gat No.6 out of six
gats. The constituency from which the petitioner was
elected consisted of 17 other Directors. Respondents,
however, made party to all six candidates who had
contested the election from Gat No.6 of the Karkhana.
3. An application, therefore, was filed by the
petitioner to reject
ig the Election Petition on the ground
of non-joinder of necessary parties. The learned
Additional Commissioner basically accepted the
preliminary objection, but to meet ends of justice and
as the Election Petition is at preliminary stage of
hearing and as the written statement was also not yet
filed and, therefore, in the interest of justice,
directed to join all the returned candidates from six
gats of the Karkhana. There is no such provision under
the Act to dismiss such Election Petition at such
interlocutory stage. Even otherwise, it is necessary
that all necessary parties should be joined for proper
adjudication of the matter. However, the direction to
joint all returned candidates by Order dated 06.08.2008
though the Election Petition was filed on 06.11.2007, in
which the aspect of limitation just cannot be
overlooked. In a given case, it may go to the root of
the matter.
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 14:29:21 :::
3
4. Therefore, keeping all points open for both the
parties including of delay, limitation and whether these
parties are necessary parties or proper parties to the
Election Petition, I am not inclined to interfere with
the impugned Order dated 06.08.2008 in question. The
Election Petition to proceed in accordance with law.
5. Resultantly, writ petition is disposed of in the
above terms. No costs.
[ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.]
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 14:29:21 :::