AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
G. Narendar, J
Heard the learned counsel for the review petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent No.4 Smt.B V Vidyulatha who has voluntarily put in appearance.
The learned counsel for the review petitioners would take this Court to para 5 of the order and would state that an erroneous submission was made that the society comprises of only 112 members and that the same has been recorded by this Court. But in fact there are nearly 2850 members.
On reading of para 5, more particularly the last sentence of para 5 this Court has merely recorded the submission made by the learned counsel and it is not a finding rendered after determination of any point in issue. It was immaterial for determining the point in issue. The review petitioners have not placed any material on record to indicate that the returning officer or the concerned authorities have rejected their application or nomination on the basis of the order disposing of the original writ petition. If the review petitioners are otherwise entitled in law it is open to them to approach the returning officer or such other authorities who are competent to determine their membership issue.
It is also made clear that the membership strength as noted in the order is not a finding but merely a recording of the submission made by the counsel. It is for the returning officer or the competent authority to ensure that all members who are enrolled are not denied their legitimate right. In that view of the matter, the review petition does not merit any further consideration. Accordingly the same stands dismissed.
All questions regarding the eligibility or otherwise of the review petitioners or other members similarly situated are to be determined by the competent authority or the competent forum and all contentions with regard to the eligibility to vote or validity of membership are left open to be determined in accordance with law.