Judgment V. M. SAHAI, J. ( 1. ) THE petitioners in this writ petition are the societies which are registered under the provisions of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'). THE petitioners are functioning as per the bye-laws of the Societies in the interest of their members. THE date of registration of the petitioner Nos. 1 to 5 Societies by the Competent Authority are 23-2-2009, 23-7-2009, 23-7-2009, 23-7-2009 and 19-2-2009 respectively. In this petition, the petitioners have challenged the common order dated 17-7-2011 passed by the Authorised Officer, the respondent No. 1 by which the respondent No. 1 has removed the names of the petitioners- societies from the final voters' list of the Agriculturists constituency in the election of Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Naswadi. ( 2. ) THE Director of Agricultural Marketing and Rural Finance fixed the following programme for elections to the A.P.M.C., Naswadi : 1. THE date for declaration of election programme 31-5-2011 2. THE date for instruction by Authorised Officer for preparation of voters' list. 31-5-2011 3. THE date for the A.P.M.C. to send the list of voters to the Authorised Officer. 7-6-2011 4. THE date for publication of the preliminary list of voters. 14-6-2011 5. THE last date of receiving objections against the above list. 28-6-2011 6. THE date for publication of provisional voters' list or the revised draft voters' list. 5-7-2011 7. THE last date for submitting objections against the above list. 12-7-2011 8. THE last date for publication of the final list of voters. 17-7-2011 9. THE date for filing nomination forms. 16-8-2011 10. THE date for publication of nomination forms. 16-8-2011 11. THE date of scrutiny of nomination forms. 17-8-2011 12. THE date for withdrawal of nomination forms. 20-8-2011 13. THE date for publication of final list of candidates. 20-8-2011 14. THE date of polling. 31-8-2011 15. THE date of counting. 1-9-2011 2.1. THE Authorised Officer published the preliminary voters' list on 14-6-2011 which included the names of the committee members of the petitioner-Societies and their names find place at Serial Nos. 162-172, 184-194, 195-205, 173-183 and 151-161 respectively. THE respondent No. 2-Somabhai Gokalbhai filed common objections on 27-6-2011 against inclusion of the names of the petitioner-Societies (for short 'the petitioners') in the preliminary voters' list. THE Authorised Officer issued notice to the petitioners on 26-8-2011. 162-172, 184-194, 195-205, 173-183 and 151-161 respectively. THE respondent No. 2-Somabhai Gokalbhai filed common objections on 27-6-2011 against inclusion of the names of the petitioner-Societies (for short 'the petitioners') in the preliminary voters' list. THE Authorised Officer issued notice to the petitioners on 26-8-2011. THE petitioners filed their replies on 4-7-2011 to foe effect that the petitioners are dispensing agricultural credit to their members and are functioning as per the Bye-laws of the Societies in the . interest of their members. THE Authorised Officer considered the objections of respondent No. 2 and replies of the petitioners and by order dated 5-7-2011 rejected the objections filed by respondent No. 2-Somabhai Gokalbhai and published on the same day the provisional voters' list. 2.2. After publication of the provisional voters' list on 5-7-2011, again the respondent No. 2-Somabhai Gokalbhai filed similar objection on 12- 7-2011 which had earlier been decided by the Authorised Officer. On this objection, the Authorised Officer issued notice to the petitioners on 13- 7-2011 and the petitioners submitted their replies on 15-7-2011. THE Authorised Officer by his common order dated 17-7-2011 allowed the objection raised by respondent No. 2-Somabhai Gokalbhai and the name of the petitioner-Societies were removed from the final voters' list published on 17-7-2011. 2.3. THE respondent No. 1 - the Authorised Officer and Co-operative Officer (Marketing) to District Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Vadodara has filed his affidavit-in-reply stating therein that the petitioners were not dispensing genuine agricultural credit, and therefore, their names were rightly deleted from the final voters' list as dispensing agricultural credit by the petitioners were not as per the prescribed source of creating funds of the Societies. It has further been stated that if it is found that fraud has been committed, then earlier decision can be modified/changed and decision in Special Civil Application No. 7461 of 2009 decided on 13-8-2009 in which decision of the Apex Court has been relied to support the contention that even after rejection of the objections, the objection on the same ground could be allowed. It is also stated that the objection of respondent No. 2 - Somabhai Gokalbhai was not similar. 2.4. It is also stated that the objection of respondent No. 2 - Somabhai Gokalbhai was not similar. 2.4. In the rejoinder-affidavit, the petitioners have placed reliance on Sec. 11(1)(i) of the Gujarat Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1963 that] 8 agriculturist were to be elected by the members of the Managing; Committee of Co-operative Societies (other than co-operative marketing societies) dispensing agricultural credit in the market area. Since, the petitioners were dispensing agricultural credit in the marketing area, the members of the Managing Committee of the petitioners were entitled to be included in the voters' list. It is clear from the order dated 5-7-2011 passed by the Authorised Officer rejecting the objections of the respondent No. 2-Somabhai Gokalbhai that the petitioner-societies were dispensing agricultural credit to its members. It has been stated that the judgment of this Court in (Mehsana District Co-op. Purchase and Sales Unicn Ltd. 's case) 1998 (1) GLH 170 : [ 1998 (2) GLR 1479 ] is applicable to the facts of the instant case and the Authorised Officer was not competent to review or reverse his earlier order on the same issue. ( 3. ) WE have heard Mr. Dilip Rana, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. N. J. Shah, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent No. 1. Though, notice had been served on respondent No. 2, it appears, that he had chosen not to contest this petition. ( 4. ) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioners urged that once objections filed by the respondent No. 2 challenging inclusion of the names of the petitioner- societies in the preliminary votes' list was challenged and the objections were rejected on 5-7-2011 by the Authorised Officer, then after publication of the provisional voters' list, the respondent No. 2 could not again challenge the inclusion of the petitioners' name in the provisional voters' list. He urged that after the provisional voters' list is again published, then only under Rule 8(1A) of the Rules, new names could be challenged which had been added or entered for the first time in the provisional voters list. LEARNED Counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on the Division Bench decision of this Court in Mehsana District Co-operative Purchase and Sales Union Ltd. v. Dhadhusan Beej Utpadak Rupantar and Vechan Karnari Sahakari Mandli Ltd., 1998 (1) GLH 170 : [ 1998 (2) GLR 1479 ]. LEARNED Counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on the Division Bench decision of this Court in Mehsana District Co-operative Purchase and Sales Union Ltd. v. Dhadhusan Beej Utpadak Rupantar and Vechan Karnari Sahakari Mandli Ltd., 1998 (1) GLH 170 : [ 1998 (2) GLR 1479 ]. The order passed by the Authorised Officer entertaining objections of respondent No. 2 deleting the names of the petitioner-societies from the final voters' list is prima facie illegal. ( 5. ) LEARNED Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondent No. 1 has vehemently urged that since the earlier order passed by the Authorised Officer dated 5-7-2011 was based on fraud, therefore, the Authorised Officer had powers to review, modify or pass a fresh order on the fresh objection filed by respondent No. 2 - Somabhai Gokalbhai. ( 6. ) THE Gujarat Agricultural Produce Markets Rules, 1965 (for short "Rules") have been framed in exercise of powers under Gujarat Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1963. Rule 5 of the Rules provides for different list of voters. So far as market committee is concerned, three separate lists of voters in Gujarati language have been provided. First list relates to agriculturists constituency, second list of traders' constituency and the third list is with regard to marketing society. Rule 5 of the Rules is extracted below : "5. Different lists of voters :- For the purposes of Sec. 11, there shall be in respect of a market committee three separate lists of voters in Gujarati as follows, namely :- [(1) under clause (i) of sub-sec. (1) of Sec. 11 of the Act, a list of members of managing committees of Co-operative Societies (other than Co-operative Marketing Societies) dispensing agricultural credit in the market area]; (2) under clause (ii) of sub-sec. (1) of Sec. 11 of the Act a list of traders holding general licences in the market area; (3) under clause (iii) of sub-sec. (1) of Sec. 11 of the Act, a list of members of managing committees of Co-operative Marketing Societies situated in the market area (holding general licences.)" 6.1. Rule 7 provides for preparation of list of voters for general election. Rule 7(i) provides for co-operative society dispensing agricultural credit in market area and the society shall communicate full names and addresses of its managing committee together with place of residence of each member. Rule 7 provides for preparation of list of voters for general election. Rule 7(i) provides for co-operative society dispensing agricultural credit in market area and the society shall communicate full names and addresses of its managing committee together with place of residence of each member. After names are submitted by the society, preliminary voters' list is prepared under Rule 7(2). Rule 7 of the Rules is extracted below : "7. Preparation of list of voters for general election :- (1) Whenever a general election to market committee is to be held :- (i) every Co-operative society dispensing agricultural credit in the market area shall communicate the full names of the members of its managing committee together with the place of residence of each members; (ii) the market committee shall communicate the full names of the traders holding general licences in the market area together with the place of or residence of each such traders; and (iii) every Co-operative Marketing Society shall communicate the full names of the members of its managing committee together with the place of residence of each such member to the Authorised Officer before such date as the Director may be fix order in that behalf : Provided that the date to be so fixed shall not be later than sixty days before the date of the general election. (2) THE Authorised Officer shall within seven days from the date fixed under sub-rule (1) cause to be prepared the list of voters as required by Rule 5 on the basis of the information received under sub-rule (1), and if necessary, after making such inquiry as he may deem fit. (3) Every list of voters shall show the full name, place of residence and the serial number of each voter." 6.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has urged that the objection against the provisional voters' list under Rule 8(1) of the Rules was not maintainable since the objections to the preliminary voters' list has earlier been rejected against the preliminary voters' list published under Rule 8(1) of the Rules. Rule 8 of the Rules is extracted below : "8. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has urged that the objection against the provisional voters' list under Rule 8(1) of the Rules was not maintainable since the objections to the preliminary voters' list has earlier been rejected against the preliminary voters' list published under Rule 8(1) of the Rules. Rule 8 of the Rules is extracted below : "8. Provisional and final publication of lists of voters .- (1) As soon as a list of voters is prepared under Rule 5, it shall be published by the Authorised Officer by affixing a copy thereof at the office of the Market Committee and at some conspicuous place in the principal market yard in the market area along with a notice stating that any person whose name is not entered in the list of voters and who claims that his name should be entered therein or any person who thinks that his name or the name of some other person has been wrongly entered therein or has not been correctly entered, may, within fourteen days from the date of the publication of the notice, apply to the Authorised Officer for an amendment of the list of votes. (1A) After receiving applications, if any, under sub-rule (1) a revised draft list of voters shall be published by the Authorised-Officer by affixing a copy thereof on the notice board of Agricultural Produce Market Committee and at some conspicuous place in the principal market yard of the market area, along with a notice stating that any person who wishes to raise any objection against any new name entered in this list, may apply within seven days from the date of publication of this notice to the Authorised Officer for an amendment in the revised draft list of voters. (2) If any application is received under sub-rule (1A), the Authorised Officer shall decide the same and shall cause to be prepared and published the final list of voters after making such amendments therein as may be necessary in pursuance of the decision given by him on the application. THE final list shall be prepared at least thirty days before the date fixed for nomination of candidates for the election." ( 7. THE final list shall be prepared at least thirty days before the date fixed for nomination of candidates for the election." ( 7. ) THE question raised by learned Counsel for the petitioners had been decided by a Division Bench of this Court in Mehsana District Co-operative Purchase and Sales Union Ltd. v. Dhadhusan Beej Utpadak Rupantar and Vechan Karnari Sahakari Mandli Ltd., 1998 (1) GLH 170 : [ 1998 (2) GLR 1479 ], wherein this Court has held in Paragraph 5 as under : "5. THE Scheme of the preparation of the voters' list is provided under Rule 8. THE Authorised Officer, who is appointed for conduct of the general election of the Market Committee, has to publish the voters' list prepared under Rule 5, by-affixing a copy thereof at the office of the Market Committee and at some conspicuous place in the principal market yard in the market area along with a notice stating that any person whose name is not entered in the list of voters and who claims that his name should be entered therein or any person who thinks that his name or the name of some other person has been wrongly entered therein or has not been correctly entered, may, within fourteen days from the date of the publication of the notice, apply to the Authorised Officer for an amendment of the list of voters. In the instant case, such preliminary voters' list was published on 24-10-1997. THE petitioners, in these Special Civil Applications, did not file any objection nor any other person filed any petition regarding the inclusion of their names in the preliminary voters' list. After the publication of preliminary voters' list, the Authorised Officer published the revised draft list, as provided under Rule 8(1A) on 12-11-1997. In the revised draft list also, the petitioners' names were included. THE interpretation of Rule 8(1A) assumes some importance. After the publication of preliminary voters' list, the Authorised Officer published the revised draft list, as provided under Rule 8(1A) on 12-11-1997. In the revised draft list also, the petitioners' names were included. THE interpretation of Rule 8(1A) assumes some importance. It is as follows : "After receiving applications, if any, under sub-rule (1) a revised draft list of voters shall be published by the Authorised Officer by affixing a copy thereof on the notice board of Agricultural Produce Market Committee and at some conspicuous place in the principal market yard of the market area, along with a notice stating that any person who wishes to raise any objection against any new name entered in this list, may apply within seven days from the date of publication of this notice to the Authorised Officer for an amendment in the revised draft list of voters." (Emphasis supplied) From Rule 8(1A), it is clear that, after the publication of the revised draft list, the Authorised Officer shall publish a notice stating that any person who wishes to raise any objection against any new name entered in the list, may apply within seven days from the date of publication of the notice to the Authorised Officer for an amendment in the revised draft list of voters. From Rule 8(1A), it is clear that, objection could be raised by any person only regarding the entry of any new name in the revised draft list. If the names were already in -the preliminary list as well as in the revised draft list, no person can raise any objection regarding that. If any new name was entered in the revised draft list, objection could be raised and the Authorised Officer has to decide whether such entry or entries shall be deleted or not. THErefore it is clear that the Authorised Officer illegally omitted the names of the petitioners from the final voters' list and it is contrary to Rule 8(1A)." THE aforesaid decision squarely applies to the facts of the instant case. ( 8. ) THE decisions relied by learned Assistant Government Pleader as mentioned in affidavit-in-reply are not applicable to the facts of the instant case. ( 8. ) THE decisions relied by learned Assistant Government Pleader as mentioned in affidavit-in-reply are not applicable to the facts of the instant case. THE Division Bench in Special Civil Application No. 7461 of 2009, Patel Chandrakant Thakorbhai v. State of Gujarat, decided on 13-8-2009 found that after the declaration of election programme and publication of preliminary voters' list, 100 fresh licences were issued and when the names of these 100 fresh licences were also included in the provisional list of voters', then objections were filed against inclusion of their names in the provisional list of traders constituency. THE Authorised Officer rejected the objections and published the final list of voters. THE Bench relied on the decision in Kalubhai Ranabhai Akabari v. State of Gujarat, 2007 (3) GLH 57 and held that the relevant date for determining the eligibility of a person for inclusion in the voters' list would be the date on which the Authorised Officer is communicated the names as indicated in sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the Rules. In the fact situation of the case and relying on the decision of the Apex Court in Pundlik v. State of Maharashtra, 2005 (7) SCC 181 and Election Commission of India v. Ashok Kumar, 2000 (8) SCC 216 , the Division Bench went on to hold that 100 persons who were granted fresh traders licence for the first time could not have been included in the final voters' list and quashed the names of 100 persons and directed for deleting their names from the final list of voters. This decision of the Division Bench is not applicable to the facts of the present case. ( 9. ) ONCE the objection filed by the respondent No. 2 had been rejected on 5-7-2011, the second objection to the provisional voters' list was not maintainable. We have gone through both the objections. Both the objections are same except that they have been couched by giving different expression. Therefore, the order dated 17-7-2011 passed by the Authorised Officer cannot be maintained as in view of Rule 8(1A), the petitioners name could not be deleted from the provisional voters' list as it was not a new name which could be challenged by the respondent No. 2. Therefore, the order dated 17-7-2011 passed by the Authorised Officer cannot be maintained as in view of Rule 8(1A), the petitioners name could not be deleted from the provisional voters' list as it was not a new name which could be challenged by the respondent No. 2. The deletion of petitioner's name from the final voters' list was illegal and beyond the powers of the Authorised Officer provided in Rule 8(1 A) of the Rules. The deletion of petitioners-societies names from the final list of voters was without any authority of law and the order passed by the Authorised Officer was completely destructive of the democratic process and a fraud on the elections. ( 10. ) FOR the reasons given above, this writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order dated 17-7-2011 passed by the Authorised Officer, the respondent No. 1, by which the respondent No. 1 has deleted and removed the names of the petitioners-Societies from the final voters' list of the Agriculturists Constituency in the election of Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Naswadi, is quashed and the petitioners names shall be treated to be valid in the provisional voters' list and the petitioners- Societies names should be incorporated and included in the final voters' list forthwith and they shall be permitted to participate and contest the elections of aforesaid committee. Rule is made absolute. Direct service permitted. Petition allowed.