Back
2005 Supreme(UK) 54
2005 (1) U.D. 316
High Court of Uttaranchal
V.S. Sirpurkar,Prafulla C. Pant, JJ.
Krishi Yantra Vipran Sehkari Samiti Ltd., Roorkee and others
Vs.
Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Uttaranchal and others
Writ Pet. no. 156(M/B) of 2005
Decided on : 24-02-2005.
Sri Alok Singh, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri B.S. Bisht, Advocate for the petitioners.
Sri K. P. Upadhyaya, Advocate for the State of Uttaranchal.
The court emphasized the mandatory nature of election rules, the authority of the Election Officer, and the importance of conducting elections in good faith.
Headnote:
Co-operative Society - Election Dispute - Uttaranchal Co-operative Societies Act, 2003, Rule 451 of the Rules - The court discussed the provisions of the Uttaranchal Co-operative Societies Act, 2003 and Rule 451 of the Rules, highlighting the mandatory nature of the rules and the authority of the Election Officer to suspend or postpone the election. The court emphasized the importance of providing clear notice for elections and concluded that the election had been reduced to a mockery due to the illegalities in the election process.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, a Co-operative Society and its elected members, challenged the exclusion of their names from the election process, alleging political pressure and illegalities in the election program.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the election process was marred by illegalities and high-handed actions, reducing the election to a mockery. It concluded that the election program was not conducted in good faith and interfered in its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to set aside the election program.
Issues: Exclusion of petitioners from the election process, breach of Rule 451 of the Rules, and the authority of the Election Officer to suspend or postpone the election.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the mandatory nature of Rule 451 of the Rules, the authority of the Election Officer to suspend or postpone the election, and the importance of providing clear notice for elections. It concluded that the election had been reduced to a mockery due to the illegalities in the election process.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, the election program was set aside, and the authorities were directed to hold the election program de novo.
1. Heard Mr. Alok Singh, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. B.S. Bisht, Advocate appearing for the petitioners and Mr. K.P. Upadhyaya, Standing Counsel for the State.
2. This writ petition is on behalf of the four petitioners, first of whom, is a Co-operative Society called Krishi Yantra Vipran Sehkari Samiti Ltd., Roorkee. The other three Writ petitioners c1ained to be the elected members from that Society, itself, for taking part and voting in the election of the Apex Society, namely, Thok Kendriya Upbhokta Sehkari Bhandar Ltd., Devpura, Haridwar through its Secretary. The said petitioner No.1, Co-operative Society, was registered under the U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 having being registered on 30-10-2000 in erstwhile State of Uttar Pradesh. It was registered as per the U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 and was registered in division Saharanpur.
3. On 09-11-2000 the State of Uttaranchal came in to being. This Society; which was operating at Roorkee, which was a part of the Saharanpur Division; was included in the newly created State of Uttaranchal and that is how, ordinarily, all the Societies operating in the area of Roorkee became the Co-operative Societies in Uttaranchal, particularly, because of the provisions of Section 129 of Uttaranchal Co-operative Societies Act, 2003. The fact that this Society was operating and was recognised as such by the Uttaranchal authorities would be clear from the fact that earlier the District Magistrate, Haridwar had held the elections of this Society whereby, the petitioner Nos. 2, 3 and 4 were elected as its representatives or delegates, as the case may be, to take part in the election of the Apex Society. It is also seen that there is a communication on record dated 13th December, 2004, whereby the District Assistant Registrar of the Co-operative Societies, Haridwar had, by the communication of even date, directed the petitioner No. 1 Society, to deposit the election dues with that office. So also, it seems from the record before us that this Co-operative Society had paid the amount of Rs. 3,600/towards those dues and had deposited the same in District Co-operative Bank, Haridwar at Roorkee on 22-12-2004. This was done under the intimation to the said authority dated 22-12-2004, a copy of which is available on record. It seems that earlier there was a Notification dated 19-10-2004 regarding the provisional constituencies, wherein the name of the petitioner No. 1 Society, appeared along with its total number of members and Directors.
4. A further notification was issued on 05-11-2004 for the elections of the different Societies including the petitioner No. 1 Society, for which one Shri Satyapal Singh Chauhan, A.D.O., Social Welfare Development Block, Narsan was appointed as an Election Officer and the programme of election was also got published wherein, the petitioner NO.1 Society, was shown at serial No. 21. This was an election programme for the election of the managing body of the petitioner No.1 Society. It is, then, asserted in the writ petition that on 05-11-2004, one Shri Vinod Kumar was elected as Chairman and Shri Anand Goyal was elected as Vice Chairman and petitioner Nos. 2, 3 and 4 were elected as delegates for the Thok Kendriya Upbhokta Sehkari Bhandar Ltd., Haridwar. This election was held on 22-11-2004 and 23-11-2004 and it is the case of the petitioners that likewise the elections were held in number of such primary Societies.
5. We have already made a reference to the letter dated 13-12-2004, whereby the respondent No. 2 had directed the petitioner No. 1 to deposit the entire fee collected along with the nomination papers for the election of petitioner No.1 and that the said amount of Rs. 3,600/- was deposited. It seems, thereafter, one Notification came to be published for the election programme and by the Notification dated 19-01-2005 the interim voters' list was published and the objections, if any, were invited on 21-01-2005 and the final voters'
