Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 2494 (ALL)

Har Dayal v. State of U. P.

2009-07-07

ANIL KUMAR, S.P.MEHROTRA

body2009
ORDER S. P. Mehrotra and Anil Kumar, JJ.—The present writ petition under Article 226, Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner, inter alia, praying for directing the respondent No. 1 to hold the election of the Committee of Management of the 'Central Society', i.e., District Co-operative Bank Ltd. by the members who were there at the time of appointment of the Administrator /Administrator Committee in the 'Central Society' and before the notification of the dates of elections, and further directing the respondents not to induct new members in the Central Society, i.e., District Co-operative Bank Limited. 2. We have heard Sri Rana Mritunjay Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Chief Standing Counsel appearing for respondents No. 1 to 4 and perused the record. 3. The learned Chief Standing Counsel appearing for respondents No. 1 to 4 submits that the programme for election of various co-operative societies has already been published, and the election process has already started, and therefore, no interference is called for under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4. Sri Rana Mritunjay Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute that the election process has already started but submits that on account of various illegalities being committed by the administrator including inducting new members in the Society in question, the election would be materially affected. 5. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that as the election process has already started, it is not a fit case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 6. Rule 444C of the U. P. Co-operative Societies Rules, 1968 framed under the U. P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 provides as under : "444C. (1) The election in a co-operative society shall not be called in question either by arbitration or otherwise except on the ground that : (a) the election has not been a fair election by reasons that corrupt practice, bribery or undue influence has extensively prevailed at the election, or (b) the result of the election has been materially affected : (i) by improper acceptance or rejection of any nomination, or (ii) by improper reception, refusal or rejection of voters, or (iii) by gross failure to comply with the provisions of the Act, the rules or the bye-laws of the society. Explanation.—For the purpose of this rule corruption, bribery or undue influence shall have the meaning assigned to each under Section 123 of the Representation of People Act, 1951. (2) A dispute relating to election shall be referred by the aggrieved party within forty-five days of the declaration of the result." 7. In view of the above-quoted rule, it will be open to the petitioner to challenge the election of Committee of Management after the conclusion of the election on various grounds mentioned in the above-quoted rule. 8. Proviso in sub-section (1) of Section 70 of the U. P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 shows that dispute relating to an election may be referred to the Registrar after the declaration of the result of such election. 9. In consequence of the aforesaid, the writ petition is dismissed subject to the observations made above.