912-wp-7284-2026.odt (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7284 OF 2026 Govindrao Shankarrao Jadhav VERSUS The State Co Operative Election Authority Thr Its Secretary And Others ... Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Ingole Govind Rangrao Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : Mr. S.K. Kadam Advocate for Respondent No.3 : Mr. V.D. Hon, Senior Counsel a/w Mr. S.S. Kote i/b Mr. A.V. Hon. ... CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J. DATED : JULY 10, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. Present petition takes exception to order dated 01.07.2026 passed by respondent no.2/Returning Officer thereby rejecting objection of petitioner and accepting nomination of respondent no.3 at election of Nanded District Central Co-operative Bank for the term 2026-31. 2. Mr. Ingole, learned advocate appearing for petitioner submits that respondent no.3 submitted his nomination along with certificate dated 26.06.2026 alleged to have issued by Guruji Abhinav Krushak Utpadit Vipnan Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit, Sindhi, Tq. Umari, District Nanded to indicate that he is working as Director of said society since 11.02.2020. Mr. Ingole relying upon notification dated 29.03.2023 issued by Assistant Registrar, Umari submits that declaration of election in respect of Guruji Abhinav Krushak Utpadit 2026:BHC-AUG:27545 912-wp-7284-2026.odt (2) Vipnan Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit do not show name of respondent no.3 as elected Director and, therefore, said certificate is false. 3. Mr. Hon, learned senior counsel appearing for respondent no.3 invites attention of this Court to written objection raised by petitioner before Returning Officer. 4. Perusal of para 2 of said objection suggest that objection was not raised properly thereby indicating objection of petitioner to experience certificate. Perusal of objection dated 01.07.2026 at page no.23 in this petition suggest that para 2 is worded vaguely and it is difficult to gather exact nature of objection. In this backdrop, Returning Officer cannot be faulted while relying upon experience certificate tendered by respondent no.3. 5. This Court finds that Returning Officer has rightly relied upon certificate that was tendered along with nomination, however, petitioner can be relegated to post election remedy under Section 91 of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 to raise election dispute. 6. In that case, observations made herein-above would not be impediment. With this liberty, Writ Petition stands rejected. (S.G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.) Mujaheed//