The court affirmed the right of a State to nominate members to the Board of a multi-State cooperative based on statutory provisions and the society's bye-laws, emphasizing procedural fairness and jurisdictional clarity.

JUDGMENT :

Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.

I.A. No. 7389 of 2025.

Heard Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned senior counsel for the proposed intervenor, Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, learned Advocate General appearing for the petitioner, Mr. S.P. Roy, learned G.A.- Bihar, Mr. Anil Kumar, learned ASGI, Mr. Manoj Tandon, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 6 and Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, learned senior counsel for the newly added respondent no. 7.

This application has been preferred for impleading the proposed intervenor as a party respondent in the main writ application on the ground that the proposed intervenor is the elected Director of Category- A SC/ST quota, as per the voter list of members who would participate and cast their votes in the election of office bearers of BISCOMAUN.

It has been stated that in order to protect his right, the proposed intervenor be made a party respondent and in similar circumstances, one of the members of the Board of Directors has been allowed to intervene in the present writ application in I.A. No. 6374 of 2025 vide order dated 08.05.2025.

On consideration of the aforesaid, we hereby allow this interlocutory application and the proposed intervenor, namely, Maneshwar Pahan is impleaded as party respondent no. 8 in the writ application.

I.A. No. 7389 of 2025 stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) No. 2485 of 2025.

1. Heard Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, learned Advocate General appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Anil Kumar, learned ASGI, Mr. S.P. Roy, Learned G.A.- Bihar, Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, learned senior counsel for the newly added respondent no. 7, Mr. Ashit Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 5, Mr. Manoj Tandon, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 6 and Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned senior counsel for the newly added respondent no. 8.

2. In this writ application, the petitioner has made the following prayers:

(i) For issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash and cancel the letter dated 5.5.2025 (Annexure-8) issued by the Respondent No. 3 whereby and whereunder it has been decided that there cannot be a nominee director of Govt of Jharkhand on the Board of BISCOMAUN in the absence of equity share holding of the State of Jharkhand.

(ii) For issuance of an writ of certiorari to quash and cancel the notification issued by the Respondent No. 2 contained in memo no. 3066 dated 3.4.2025 (Annexure-7) whereby it has been mentioned that the State of Bihar has 99.26% share holding in the BISCOMAUN and the Govt of Jharkhand has no share capital in the BISCOMAUN and as such the Director nominated by the Govt of Jharkhand IS NOT in accordance with Section 48 (1)(c) of Multi-State Cooperative Society Act, 2002.

(iii) For a writ of mandamus command the respondents to allow the nominee Director of the State of Jharkhand to participate in the Election of office bearers in BISCOMAUN to be held on 8 and 9th of May, 2025.

(iv) Be further pleased to stay the operation of the impugned letter dated 5.5.2025 and notification dated 3.4.2025 during the pendency of the present writ application.

(v) For issuance of other appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction /directions as may deem fit and proper by this Hon’ble Court in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. The factual aspects of the case reveal that Bihar State Cooperative Marketing Union Limited (hereinafter referred to as BISCOMAUN for the sake of brevity), came into existence