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

2022 Supreme(UK) 46

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
SHARAD KUMAR SHARMA, J.
Virendra Singh Mehra and another - Petitioners
Versus
Director/Registrar, Dairy Development and others - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 1786 of 2021 (M/S)
Decided On : 17-02-2022

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Sandeep Tiwari.
For the Respondents: Mr. C.S. Rawat, Chief Standing Counsel, Mr. Sadeep Kothari.

The suspension of election should only occur under specific circumstances as provided in the rules, and the appointment of an alternative body and election officer may be necessary to ensure a free and fair election.

Headnote:

Election - Cooperative Society - Uttarakhand Cooperative Societies Act - Rule 450 Sub Rule (4) of the Uttarakhand Cooperative Societies Rules of 2004 - Rule 30, 16, 17 of the Uttarakhand Rajya Sehkari Samiti Nirwachan Niyamawali 2018 - Suspension of election, appointment of Election Officer, and conduct of election discussed

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners challenged the impugned order suspending the election of two Cooperative Society blocks. They contended that the election process had already commenced and objections had been heard, thus the suspension was not justified under the rules. The court considered the rules regulating the election of Primary Cooperative Societies and concluded that the suspension of election cannot be routine and should only occur under specific circumstances.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the suspension of the election was not justified under the rules and ordered the appointment of an alternative body and election officer to conduct the election in a free and fair manner, ensuring the objective of constituting the body of the Cooperative Societies is met.

Issues: The issues revolved around the justification for suspending the election, the appointment of the Election Officer, and the conduct of the election in accordance with the rules.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the suspension of election cannot be routine and should only occur under specific circumstances as provided in the rules. It also highlighted the need for a free and fair election and the appointment of an alternative body and election officer to address the objections raised by the public.

Final Decision: The court disposed of the writ petition with a direction to appoint an alternative body and election officer to conduct the election in a free and fair manner, ensuring the objective of constituting the body of the Cooperative Societies is met, within two months from the date of the order.

JUDGMENT :

Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

The petitioners to the present writ petition had put a challenge to the impugned order dated 31.08.2021, as passed by respondent no.2, whereby as a consequence of passing of the impugned order, the election of the two Cooperative Society blocks of Kotabagh and Ramnagar, which was supposed to be held for the Primary Dugdh Cooperative Society, had been directed to be kept in abeyance till the conclusion of enquiry which was directed to be conducted by the Joint Director, Dairy.

2. The petitioners in the present writ petition has come up with the case, that the petitioner nos.1 & 2, they claimed that they are the Directors and Vice Chairman of Nainital Dugdh Utpadak Sehkari Sangh Limited, in which the petitioner no.1 was elected as a delegate and thereafter as a Director in Nainital Dugdh Utpadak Sehkari Sangh Limited. The petitioner no.1 has contended, that prior to his election as a Director referred above, initially he was elected as a Member of the Management Committee of the Dugdh Utpadak Sehkari Samiti. The contention of the petitioners in the writ petition, is that the terms of the Committee of Management of the aforesaid Cooperative Society, which commenced from 21.09.2016, which had its term for five years was supposed to expire on 20.09.2021 and as a consequence thereto the election of Dugdh Utpadak Sehkari Samiti, Madiya Ramnagar and that of Kotabagh too was scheduled to be held prior to expiry of the term of the aforesaid Committee of Management of the Cooperative Society i.e. on 20.09.2021.

3. The petitioner no.2 has come up with the case that initially he was the Director of Naintal Dugdh Utpadak Sehkari Sangh Samiti, Lal Kuwan, District Nainital and he was too elected as a Member of the Committee of Management of the Dugdh Utpadak Sehkari Samiti and that as per the terms of the elected Committee of Management which was supposed to expire on 20.09.2021 it will be having a consequential effect of the cessation of the terms of Committee of Management of Dugdh Utpadak Sehkari Samiti, Madiya Ramnagar, District Nainital.

4. The petitioners in the writ petition has come up with the case, that the election of the Primary Cooperative Societies are being governed by the Rules called as “Uttarakhand Rajya Sehkari Samiti Nirwachan Niyamawali 2018”, as it has been notified by the State Government on 27.06.2018, while exercising its powers under Section 128 of the Uttarakhand Cooperative Societies Act. The petitioners contended, that since the term of the Committee of Management was expiring on 20.09.2021, as such the respondent no.4 while exercising its powers under Rule 450 Sub Rule (4) of the Uttarakhand Cooperative Societies Rules of 2004 framed under the Act of 2003, had issued a publication on 12.08.2021, whereby it had determined the extent of the area of each of the constituencies of the respective Cooperative Societies and the total number of seats, which would be allocated for it for the purposes of facilitating the forthcoming elections. He further submitted that in accordance with the provisions contained under the aforesaid Sub Rule (4) of Rule 450 of the Rules of 2004, the objections were invited from all quarters, for the purposes of provisional determination by the respective constituencies and after inviting of the objections as per Rules of 2004, the hearing of the objections had admittedly taken place on 25.08.2021, as contemplated under Sub Rule (7) of Rule 450 of the Rules and the hearing as such, for the determination of the constituency and the allocation of the seats took place in the office of respondent no.4.

5. Simultaneously, by virtue of the publication of 12.08.2021, it is contended by the petitioners, that respondent no.2; has declared the election programme of the respective Cooperative Societies, as already detailed above and particularly pertaining to Ramnagar and Kotabagh too and accordingly under the Rules of 2018, particularly under Rule 31, the election programme

    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