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

1992 Supreme(Raj) 852

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH
V.K.Singhal, J.
Purshottam Sharma - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan and Ors. - Respondent
S. B. Civil Misc. Stay Application No. 4538 of 1992 in S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5452 of 1992.
Decided On : 31-08-1992

The court has the power to order an investigation into allegations of corruption against public officials.

Headnote:

COOPERATIVE SOCIETY - ELECTION - ADMINISTRATOR APPOINTMENT - ALLEGATIONS OF CORRUPTION - INVESTIGATION ORDERED - ELECTION PROCESS TO BE STARTED IMMEDIATELY - ASSETS OF SOCIETY TO BE SEIZED TILL NEWLY ELECTED BODY TAKES CHARGE.

Fact of the Case:

A writ petition was filed alleging corruption and malafide appointment of an Administrator in a cooperative society. The petitioner alleged that the Deputy Registrar and other officials demanded money and plots to allow the society to hold elections. The respondents denied the allegations.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the allegations of corruption were serious and required investigation. It also found that the society was not functioning properly and that the election process had been delayed. The court directed the Deputy Registrar to appoint an officer to investigate the allegations and submit a report within one month.

Issues: 1. Whether the allegations of corruption against the Deputy Registrar and other officials were true. 2. Whether the Administrator was appointed malafidely. 3. Whether the society was functioning properly. 4. Whether the election process had been delayed.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the allegations of corruption were serious and required investigation. It also held that the society was not functioning properly and that the election process had been delayed. The court directed the Deputy Registrar to appoint an officer to investigate the allegations and submit a report within one month.

Final Decision: The court vacated the ex-parte stay order dated 5th August, 1992. It also directed the Administrator to immediately start the election process and not to take part in any purchase, sale, allotment, transfer or otherwise of any land or plot thereof. The amount lying in the bank was also ordered to be seized till a newly independent elected body takes charge.

JUDGMENT

1. 1. I have heard learned counsel for the parties on the stay application.

2. Brief facts of the case are that a petition was filed in the court of Addl. Munisif and Judicial Magistrate, Jaipur, which was subsequently withdrawn. This petition was filed in the name of Anand Bhawan Nirman Sahkari Samiti and was signed by Shri Ramesh Chand Sharma, Secretary. A writ petition was filed by Ramesh Kumar as Secretary of Anand Bhawan Nirman Sahkari Samiti Ltd. which was registered as SB Civil Writ Petition No. 4423/92 and was dismissed on July 30, 1992. Thereafter, a fresh writ petition has been filed by Purshottam Sharma, Treasurer of the Society and the above society has been made as one of the respondents. An ex-parte stay was granted to the petitioner on August 5, 1992, where in the Election Officer was directed to hold elections in accordance with law and the respondent No. 6 was directed to assist the Election Officer in holding the elections.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has alleged that the dispute is on account of the fact that the Society has a scheme for Amoroodwala Bag, which is a prestigious scheme and some decision has been taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in favour of the Society and that on 6th June, 1992 Shri Phool Chand Doodi, Joint Registrar, Cooperative Society called Shri Hanuman Sharma, Vice President of the Society at his residence in the morning hours and told him that it has been decided in the meeting at high level that an Administrator should be appointed by superseding the Election Committee of the Society. It is alleged that it was further informed that in case the society is willing to spend something then he may reconsider the matter. Shri Hanuman Sharma told that he will reply tomorrow and went away. Shri Hanuman Sahai discussed this matter with the petitioner who was the Treasurer of the Society. Thereafter an enquiry was made by the petitioner and it was found that no meeting at any level was held to appoint the Administrator and therefore, they decided to meet the Registrar next day. On 7th June, 1992 Shri Hanuman Sahai went to the residence of Joint Registrar and at that time Shri Om Prakash Nagar S/o Shri Chaturbhuj Sharma, Minister for Cooperative Department and Shri Raj Kumar Pandya were sitting with the Joint Registrar. It is alleged that Shri Phool Chand Doodi, Joint Registrar told Hanuman Sahai that in case the Society is able to pay Rs. 10 Lacs and seven plots in Amrood Wala Bag, the Administrator will not be appointed and elections will be allowed to be held. Shri Hanuman Sahai told that the demand is very high. It is alleged that the Joint Registrar informed him that he will have one plot for the Joint Registrar at Jaipur, Shri M. L. Jain one Plot for Additional Registrar Shri S. P. Gupta, one for Deputy Registrar Shri Mahender Singh and 4 plots will be divided between himself and the Minister. With regard to the cash amount, he told that 2 lacs will be paid to the Deputy Registrar Shri Mahender Singh Rathore and 8 lacs is to be divided between himself and the Minister. Shri Hanuman Sahai told that this is too much, but the Joint Registrar stated that this is not much and when this scheme is approved they will pay more. It is alleged that on this Shri Hanuman Sahai told that if they can give guarantee for the approval of the scheme, then the proposal can be considered, but the Joint Registrar insisted on payment of money and plots. Shri Doodi made it clear to Shri Hanuman Sahai that they will not allow to hold the elections and the Administrator will be appointed. Shri Hanuman Sahai came back and narrated the entire incident to the petitioner and other members of the society and it was decided that the Society will face the situation, instead of yielding to the illegal demands.

4. It is stated that thereafter on 15.6.1992, the Inspector of Cooperative Society came to the office of the Society and told the members of the society that they may talk to Shri Mahender Singh Rath








Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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