ORDER:- Heard learned Govt. Pleader also. 2. Delay defeats the rights of parties has come true in this case. The petitioner submitted his nomination to contest the election to the managing committee of the 4th respondent co-operative society. The election notification was published on 15-7-1994. 21-7-1994 was the last date for submission of nominations and 22-7-1994 was the date fixed for scrutiny of nomination and election is scheduled to be held on 14-8-1994. The petitioner submitted his nomination on 21-7-1994. It was rejected by the second respondent Returning Officer as per Ext. P 1 stating that the petitioner's nomination is not liable to be accepted since he is a defaulter to the society. Ext. P1 is dated 22-7-1994. On receipt of Ext. P1, the petitioner filed Ext. P3 representation before the Asst. Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Thalappilly and also before the Joint Registrar. According to the petitioner, he is not a defaulter. On the other band, he is only a subscriber of a chit in which he is making subscriptions to the society. 3. When this original petition came up for admission on 11-8-1994, I issued notice by special messenger to respondents 2 and 4. Govt. Pleader took notice for respondents 1 and 3. 4. When the matter came up for further hearing today, learned Govt. Pleader produced the relevant files for my perusal. The second respondent Returning Officer is also present in Court. 5. Having heard learned Govt. Pleader and having perused the relevant files, I am satisfied that the petitioner is not a defaulter to the society nor is he in defalut. Even so, the question is whether the petitioner is entitled to any relief from this Court in this proceedings at this stage. As already noticed, election is stated to be held on 14-8-1994. The Returning Officer present in Court submits that all formalities for the election is complete including the printing of ballot papers. If any direction is issued at this stage to permit the petitioner to contest the election, the entire election exercise has to be re-done. Had the petitioner been vigilent enough regarding his rights, he could have approached this Court sufficiently early in which case this Court would have, having regard to the illegalities and irregularities brought to light in regard to rejection of petitioner's nomination paper issued appropriate direction to the returning officer permitting him to contest the election. Had the petitioner been vigilent enough regarding his rights, he could have approached this Court sufficiently early in which case this Court would have, having regard to the illegalities and irregularities brought to light in regard to rejection of petitioner's nomination paper issued appropriate direction to the returning officer permitting him to contest the election. In view of the inordinate delay on the part of the petitioner in approaching this Court to redress his grievance, I am not inclined to grant any relief to the petitioner in this proceedings. The Original Petition is therefore dismissed. Petition dismissed.