SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Gau) 263

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Ashutosh Kumar, C.J., Arun Dev Choudhury, J.
Ayesha Sultana Choudhury, D/O- Habibur Rahman Choudhury – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Assam And To Be Represented By The Commissioner And Secretary To The Government Of Assam, Cooperation Department And Ors. – Respondents
WA 340 of 2024
Decided On : 23-02-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr H K Das, Mr. N K Sarma, Ms. S Parveen
For the Respondent: H Yeasmin, Mr. A K Azad, Mr. H.I.Choudhury, Mr. M Sarma, Mr. S. Banik, Mr. S.K.Talukdar

The annulment of cooperative society elections requires clear evidence of material irregularities affecting the election's outcome, with proportional measures aligned to the alleged violations.

Headnote:(A) Assam Co-operative Societies Act, 2007 - Sections 26(3), 29(1), 41(4), and 41(6) - Dispute regarding the legality of AGM and election of Board of Directors - Registrar of Co-operative Societies disapproved the election citing violations of natural justice - Learned Single Judge interfered with decision, noting lack of substantiated anomalies affecting election result. (Paras 3, 6, 20, 24, 26, 28, 65)

(B) Judicial Review - The interference with the decisions of statutory authorities requires demonstration of material grounds; the nature of statutory compliance cannot automatically nullify democratic processes. (Paras 30, 50, 61)

(C) Principle of Proportionality - The annulment of elections should be proportional to the alleged irregularities, without demonstrable impact on the election outcome. (Paras 60, 64)

Facts of the case:
The case revolves around the disapproval of an AGM and election conducted by a cooperative society, where the Registrar disapproved the elections based on allegations of irregularities related to eligible voters. The elected candidates challenged this decision asserting compliance with legal requirements.

Findings of Court:
The learned Single Judge found that the Registrar's order lacked sufficient evidence to substantiate the claims of irregularities, thus characterizing the judicial action as unfounded.

Issues: The key questions included whether the alleged irregularities materially affected the election, and whether the Registrar had the jurisdiction to annul the election without proper evidence of a violation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that for substantive actions like election annulments, there must be an evidence-based inquiry into material irregularities, and the Registrar's decision failed to establish such grounds.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. hearing of the parties and appeal timeline. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. discussions on the agm/election proceedings. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)
3. arguments on election irregularities. (Para 15 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24)
4. observations on statutory compliance requirements. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36)
5. analysis of the nature of irregularities. (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46)
6. examination of election authority's jurisdiction. (Para 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54)
7. discussion on authority and election fairness. (Para 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59)
8. final remarks on judicial review and reasoning. (Para 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65)
9. conclusion affirming the learned single judge's order. (Para 66 , 67)

JUDGMENT :

Arun Dev Choudhury, J.

1. We have heard Mr. H. K. Das, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. S. K. Talukdar, learned Standing Counsel for the Co-operation Department representing the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 3; Mr. S. Banik, learned counsel and Mr. H. I. Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18 & 19.

2. The present appeal calls into question the correctness of the judgment and order (oral) dated 31.08.2024, passed in WP(C) No. 1476/2024, whereby the learned Single Judge interfered with an order dated 21.09.2023 of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Assam.

3. By the order dated 21.09.2023, impugned in the writ petition, the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Assam, declined to approve the Annual General Meeting(AGM)/Election for the constitution of the Board of Directors of Meherpur Krishnapur Co- operative Society Ltd. held on 18.03.2023 (hereinafter referred to as the Society).

4. The dispute in the present intra-Court appeal thus centres upon the legality of the Annual General Meeting and the election of the Board of Directors of Society on 18.03.2023.

5. The Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Assam, upon examination of the attendance sheet and after hearing the stakeholders, by the impugned order dated 21.09.2023, disapproved the said election. The writ petitioners, who were the beneficiaries of the uncontested election, assailed the aforesaid order in WP(C) No. 1476/2024.

6. The learned Single Judge, by the aforenoted judgment and order (oral) dated 31.08.2024, interfered with the decision of the Registrar on the reasoning that the alleged anomalies were sweeping in nature, no material was shown as to how the uncontested election stood materially affected, and that the complaint filed by the appellant lacked substantiation.

7. The important facts require consideration for proper adjudication of the controversy in a nutshell are to the effect that the Zonal Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Silchar Zone, Silchar, by order dated 17.12.2022, appointed a “One-man Committee” to manage the affairs of the society and to convene the AGM/Election within 90(ninety) days for constitution of a new Managing Committee /Board of Directors in terms of Section 41 (6) of the Assam Co-operative Societies Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 2007) as the earlier Board failed to held election in terms of section 41(4) of the Act’2007.

8. Thereafter, in a meeting held on 26.12.2022, a resolution was adopted for the correction of the Voters List, fixing the submission of applications for correction of eligible voters and for substitution of the legal heirs in place of dead persons from 14.01.2023 to 31.01.2023.

9. Subsequently, the notice was also published in two local newspapers on 11.01.2023. Some applications for substitution against deceased voters were received. A correction was also carried out, and a final Voter List was published and approved by the concerned Registrar.

10. Thereafter, the election schedule was notified, providing dates for filing and withdrawal of nominations and for holding the AGM/ Election for 15 Executive Members. 17 Nominations

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top