Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

VASANT HIRU RASAL AND ORSversusTHE DISTRICT RETURNING OFFICER THANE AND ORS

Decided
Disposal
Dismissed

Holding

The petition is dismissed as it is devoid of merit because Respondent No.6 was not a defaulter when the elections were conducted.

Summary

The petitioners challenged the authorization granted to Respondent No.6 by Respondent No.5 (a society) to vote in the society's elections, alleging that Respondent No.6 was a defaulter of Rs.97,00,000. Examination of the society's records revealed that only Rs.15,00,000 was outstanding, which Respondent No.6 deposited on 4 April 2026, with the amount credited to the society's bank account on 6 April 2026. The court held that, given the payment was made before the election, Respondent No.6 could not be considered a defaulter at the time of voting. Consequently, the petition was found to be without merit. The writ petition was dismissed.

Issues considered

  • Whether Respondent No.6 was a defaulter of society dues at the time of the election, thereby invalidating the authorization to vote.

Subjects

  • society elections
  • voter authorization
  • default of dues
  • writ petition
  • civil appellate jurisdiction
  • Bombay High Court

Judgment

2026:BHC-AS:24510

              Megha                                               911_wp_7289_2026


                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                  WRIT PETITION NO.7289 OF 2026

              Vasant Hiru Rasal and Others                       ...Petitioners

                                V/s.

              The District Returning Of3cer and
              Others                                            ...Respondents
                                            ________________
              Mr. Sagar Joshi for the Petitioners.
              Mr. A.C. Bhadang, AGP for Respondent-State.
              Mr. Ajit M. Savagave (through vc) for Respondent No.4.
              Mr. Sangram B. Suryawanshi for Respondent Nos.5 and 6.
                                            ________________


                                                      CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.

                                                       DATED: 17 JUNE 2026.


              P.C.:


              1)      Limited challenge raised by the Petitioner in this Petition is to
              the authorisation granted to Respondent No.6 by Respondent No.5-
              Society to vote in elections of Respondent No.4-Society. The Petition is
              3led under the belief that an amount of Rs.97,00,000/- was due and
              payable by Respondent No.6 on the day on which elections were held
              appointing Respondent No.6 as authorised voter of Respondent No.5.
              However, upon perusal of records of the Society, it appears that only an
              amount of Rs.15,00,000/- was due from Respondent No.6. On 4 April

                                               Page No.1 of 2
                                               17 June 2026
                          Megha                                                     911_wp_7289_2026


                          2026 Respondent No.6 deposited the due amount with the Respondent
                          No.5-Society, which has been actually deposited in the Bank Account of
                          the Society on 6 April 2026 on account of 5 April 2026 being Sunday.


                          2)          In view of the above position, it is dif3cult to conclude that
                          Respondent No.6 was a defaulter when elections were conducted.


                          3)          Writ Petition is devoid of merits and it is accordingly dismissed.




                                                                                [SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]




Signed by: Megha S. Parab
                                                               Page No.2 of 2
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge                            17 June 2026
Date: 18/06/2026 11:55:20


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.