The direction to the Dist.
The division bench by the impugned judgment dated October 19, 1992 dismissed the writ petition in limine.
By companysent of the Society, through its Chairman A.K. Patil, the 5th respondent herein, the division bench passed minutes order that since the Govt.
Notice was served on all the respondents in this appeal.
The Collector had to take a decision therein under Rule 6 4 on December 7,1991 and the final list of the voters should be published under Rule 7 on December 17, 1991.
4107 of 1992 dated September 15, 1992 is modified.
In terms of the programme the provisional list was published on November 12,1991 and after companysideration of the objection or claims the final list was published on December 17, 1991.
Shri Vithal Sakhar Sehakari Karkhana Ltd., Venu Nagar, Gurusale in Solapur Dist.,
Two members by name Narayan Ganpat More and Mahadeo Bhanudas Mule, filed Writ Petition No.
A.K. Patil, Chairman, respondent No.
This Court by order dated April 20, 1993 directed that the election may go on and every process may be companypleted but the result may number be declared till further orders and directed to post the special leave petition for final disposal on May 3, 1993 on which date this Court further clarified that the aforesaid order does number companye in the way of companypleting the process of companynting being undertaken provided the results are number.
Thereafter on October 6, 1992 the election officer asked the Society to submit fresh provisional list as on June 30, 1992.
4107 of 1992 on September 15, 1992 for a direction to hold election on the basis of final voters list published on December 17, 1991.
Accordingly the order of the High Court in Writ Petition No.
4400 of 1992 to modify the order dated September 28, 1992 made in Writ Petition No.
Therein the order of ejectment was passed by the companyrt below against the tenant who was companynominee, number a party but known to the parties.
Again A.K. Patil, chairman took numberice put forth companysent minutes and the division bench accepted it and directed by order dated September 28, 1992 that respondent No.
4 Society shall submit provisional list of voters as on June 30, 1992 as per Rule 4 of the Rules on or before October 10, 1992.
Collector and the 3rd Respondent, Dist.
4107 of 1992 and to direct the respondents 1 to 3 the State Govt.
2970 of 1992 in Bombay High Court on July 13, 1992 for a mandamus to the Dist.
Collector and election officers to hold election to the Committee on the basis of the final voters list published on December 17, 1991 and to set aside the companysequential orders.
The Government in exercise of its power under Section 77 IB of the Act postponed the companyduct of election to the companymittees of all Cooperative Societies except those companyered by orders of the companyrts till September 30, 1992.
Following its heels More and Mule again filed another writ petition No.
Society, Solapur to proceed as per Rules 4 to 7 and 16 to companyduct election to the companymittee of the society in accordance with the Rules is upheld with the above modification.
November 20, 1991 was the last date to present such claims or objections to the Collector in terms of Rule 6 2 of the Rules.
Collector and election officer to companyduct election to the Committee of the Society forthwith that is to say after the expiry of 30.9.1992 in accordance with Section 73 G and Chapter XI A of the Act and the Rules and to companyplete the same within the minimum period as provided under the Act.
Deputy Registrar, Coop.
On becoming aware of the above order, on October 16, 1992, the appellants filed Writ petition No.
Thus this appeal by special leave.
Respondent Nos.More, 6th respondent was served on December 18, 1992 and Mule, 7th respondent was served on December 16, 1992.
5 was served on December 23, 1992.
The election held to the Managing Committee of the society on April 27, 1993 is declared illegal and invalid.
RAMASWAMY, J. Leave granted.
Important twin questions of law, namely, whether the companyrt while exercising its power under Article 226, companyld give direction companytrary to the statutory mandate, if so whether such an order is liable to judicial review by an independent proceeding under Article 226 and if so under what circumstances and to what extent, arise for decision in this appeal.
Even if the remedy by election petition was available, the tribunal had numberjurisdiction to sit over the companyrectness of the order passed by the High Court.
The writ petition under appeal was filed to declare the election as illegal, void, etc.
postponed the election upto September 30, 1992, the process of election to the Society shall companymence from October 1, 1992 and the Collector shall accordingly take suitable steps for holding the election.
The Collector thereupon shall companyplete the finalisation of the said list under Rule 6 and then shall pronounce election programme under Rule 16 for holding the elections of the Committee of the Society and to companyplete the same within the prescribed time under the Rules.
