SWAMI, J. ( 1 ) IN this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner has sought for quashing the notification dated 23rd July 1988 bearing No. 14/88-89 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Kolar District, kolar published in the Karnataka Gazette dated 23-7-1988 notifying the name of the 3rd respondent under Section 27 of the karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act') as an elected member of the a. P. M. C. Kolar as a representative of Taluk agricultural Produce marketing co-operative Societies. ( 2 ) SRI B. Veerabhadrappa, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 3rd respondent has not been elected as per rule 41 of the Karnataka Agricultural produce Marketing (Regulation) Rules (hereinafter referred to as the 'rules' ). On the contrary, the Taluk Agricultural Produce marketing Co-operative Society, Kolar (TAPCMS) has passed a resolution unanimously electing the 3rd respondent as a representative of the society in the A. P. M. C. Therefore, the said resolution being violative of Rule 41 of the Rules is liable to be quashed in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution and in such a situation, it is not necessary to file an election petition as required by Section 20 of the Act. It is submitted that under Section 20 of the Act an election petition is permitted only when the election is conducted and not in the case where nomination is made. ( 3 ) THE petitioner is a member of the a. P. M. C. Kolar elected from the agriculturists Constituency. He is one of the candidates contesting election to the office of the President of the A. P. M. C. ( 4 ) THE contention that the election has not been held in accordance with Rule 41 of the Rules, therefore it does not amount to 'election' cannot at all be accepted. It may be that the election might not have been held in accordance with the Rules and on that ground it may be liable to be set aside. But it is not possible to hold that it is no election at all and therefore, the provisions of Section 20 of the Act prescribing the mode of challenging the election are not attracted. ( 5 ) THERE is also another bar for the petitioner to challenge the election of respondent-3. But it is not possible to hold that it is no election at all and therefore, the provisions of Section 20 of the Act prescribing the mode of challenging the election are not attracted. ( 5 ) THERE is also another bar for the petitioner to challenge the election of respondent-3. The petitioner is an elected member from the Agriculturists' constituency. Section 20 of the Act gives a statutory right to challenge the election and it is not a common law right. Under Section 20 only a voter or a contesting candidate can challenge the election. The petitioner is not a voter in the constituency from which the 3rd respondent is elected. He is a voter in the agriculturists' Constituency. He is not qualified to vote at the election to elect one representative of the Producers' society as he is not a member of the Managing Committee of the Producers' Society. Therefore, a voter who is not entitled to vote at the election to elect one representative of the Producers' society, is not entitled to challenge such election under Section 20 of the Act. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled, or cannot be permitted, to challenge the election of respondent No. 3 in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. Further when the statute provides a particular mode for challenging the election, it is not just and appropriate to interfere with such an election in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution after the election is held. Hence I do not consider it just and appropriate to exercise the jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the constitution. As I am declining to entertain the writ petition on the ground of alternative remedy, any observation made in this order shall not be taken as conclusive so as to affect the validity or otherwise of the election of the 3rd respondent. ( 6 ) FOR the reasons stated above, I decline to entertain the petition. The petition is rejected. All the contentions of the petitioner are left open. Writ Petition rejected. --- *** --- .