- (1.) As is now the wont, elections of office-bearers of sporting clubs in the Maidan have become acrimonious affairs. Elections were due to be held for various posts in the East Bengal Club this year. The present suit was filed in or about April this year seeking the following reliefs: a) A decree of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants /the present Executive Committee of the East Bengal Club from proceeding to hold the next election of its Executive Committee without first preparing and publishing a draft photo electoral roll, making available copies of the same to all members who may apply for such copies for the due scrutiny/approval thereof and thereafter preparing a final photo electoral roll after duly considering all objections that may be raised with regard to the draft; b) A decree of mandatory injunction directing the defendants/ the present Executive Committee of the East Bengal Club to forthwith to prepare and publish a draft photo electoral roll of all members of the club before holding further elections, to make available copies of such draft photo electoral roll for due scrutiny /approval of the members and thereafter to prepare a final photo electoral roll after duly considering all objections that may be raised with regard to the draft; c) An Administrator / Special Officer be appointed for the purpose of ensuring the due free and fair election of the next Executive Committee of the East Bengal Club to hold the next election of the Executive Committee of the club on the basis of the final photo electoral roll upon identifying the voters both on the basis of their photo identity cards and on the basis of their pan cards, driving licences, passports, voter identity cards issued by the Election Commissioner of the Government of India or other like identification; d) Receiver; e) Injunction; 3 f) Costs; g) Further and other reliefs.
(2.) Since the suit was instituted with leave under Order I Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a number of applications were received for addition of parties. Some of them have been allowed. The appearing parties agree that the orders sought in an application by the added 32nd defendant, Sekher Ghosh, in GA No. 2975 of 2010 and by the plaintiffs in their latest application, GA No. 3463 of 2010, are covered by the reliefs claimed in the suit. It is not the contesting defendants argument, despite a specific query, that the orders prayed for in the most recent applications are beyond the purview of the suit. GA No. 1320 of 2010 is the plaintiffs initial application on which several orders were passed.
(3.) Contempt proceedings were instituted for alleged non- compliance of some of the orders and the substantive orders passed in the contempt proceedings have been accepted by the parties and no grievance as to the authority of the court to make substantive orders in contempt proceedings has been raised. GA No. 1320 of 2010 was primarily for the purpose of preparation of photo electoral rolls for the club elections. The photo electoral rolls are now in place and the plaintiffs first interlocutory application appears to have worked itself out. GA No. 3277 of 2010 is an application by another member complaining of his nomination as a candidate for one of the posts having been rejected and of his name not figuring in the voters list. The applicant has abandoned the first part of the claim and only seeks an order to allow such applicant to be able to cast his vote at the election.;