IMPORTANT POINT
The election process for a cooperative society, once initiated, cannot be stopped by the Election Officer without statutory authority, reinforcing the need for adherence to legislative provisions.

ORDER :

Dinesh Mehta, J.

1. By way of present writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 06.04.2023, whereby proceedings of elections of the Chhatargarh Kraya Vikraya Sahakari Samiti Limited, Chhatargarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Samiti’) has been stayed by the Election Officer.

2. Mr. Divik Mathur, learned counsel for the petitioners navigated the Court through the relevant clauses of the byelaws of the Society, more particularly, Clauses 5, 9(4), 9(5)(ii) and 10 thereof and informed that as per Clause 10 of the byelaws, the Board would comprise of 16 Members, out of which, 7 would be elected from Primary Co-operative Society, 5 from private agriculturists/farmers, 3 Members are to be nominated by the State Government/Registrar and one Member being the Manager of the Society.

3. Learned counsel then stated that the petitioners had submitted their nomination for Executive Committee or Members of the Board of Directors pursuant to election notification dated 22.03.2023 issued by the State Co-operative Election Authority.

4. Learned counsel submitted that list of final electoral was proposed and published as per the schedule and the nomination forms were to be submitted at 09:00 a.m. of 06.04.2023. But at 08:00 a.m. of 06.04.2023 abruptly, the elections were stalled by the respondent No.4 - Election Officer. He argued that once the election process has been set in motion, the Election Officer or even the State Government has no jurisdiction or power to stay the same.

5. He submitted that the respondent No.4 has observed that Members of ¼v½ category were not available, while passing the impugned order, but the elections cannot be stayed for this reason, more particularly, when sufficient number of Members/voters of ¼c½ category were available to elect 5 Members from their category ¼c½ , as the list of electoral comprised of 92 Members.

6. He argued that if the elections are held as scheduled, 5 Members would be elected from ¼c½ category followed by 3 nominated Members of State Government and 1 Manager, then, it would constitute requisite quorum of 9 Members and therefore, the decision of the Election Officer that requisite quorum would not be available is factually incorrect.

7. He argued that if the Election Officer was of the view that requisite number of Members of the Board would not be available, he could not have stayed the process, as there is no statutory power or jurisdiction with him to do so. He added that in such event, the State or the Registrar can exercise the power to dissolve the Society (if deemed appropriate) on the ground of the functioning of the Society, but in any case, the election process which has been initiated could not have been stayed as has been done in the instant case.

8. Mr. Nathu Singh Rathore, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State submitted that when the final voter list or electoral was prepared, it transpired that not even a single voter from ¼v½ category was available and therefore, it was impossible to elect requisite 7 Members from Members of ¼v½ category and since no Member from ¼v½ category Members could be elected which is mandatory to form a valid Board, the Election Officer had no other option, but to stall the process of election.

9. Learned Additional Advocate General argued that the petitioners’ contention which appear to be legally sound cannot be accepted, particularly when the constitution of Board itself is in doubt, as no Member from ¼v½ category Members could be elected. He submitted that he would advice the State Government to undertake election process afresh and in such event, the State would try to ensure that requisite number of Members/electoral from ¼v½ category are available.

10. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

11. It will be relevant to reproduce relevant clauses of the byelaws:-

12. It is not in dispute that the constitution of Board requires 7 Members from ¼v½ category and as per th