Back
2020 Supreme(MP) 259
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT BENCH AT INDORE
Vivek Rusia, J.
Praveen Kumar Khariwal - Appellant
Versus
State Of M.P. And Others - Respondents
W.P. No. 4885 of 2020
Decided On : 29-02-2020
Shri Ashutosh Nimgaonkar, Learned Counsel, for the Appellant; Shri Pavan Sharma, learned Govt. Advocate, for the Respondents No.1 & 2/State; Shri Anshuman Shrivastava, Learned Counsel, for the Respondent No.3
The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of membership status, reinstatement orders, and adherence to by-laws in determining eligibility for inclusion in the voter list and participation in the election process.
Headnote:
Voter List Inclusion - Society Membership Dispute - M.P. Societies Registration Act, 1973 - Summary of the acts and sections referenced and discussed by the court: M.P. Societies Registration Act, 1973, Section 15 - The court discussed the provisions of the M.P. Societies Registration Act, 1973, particularly Section 15, which pertains to the membership of the society and the principles of natural justice. The court analyzed the Registrar's order and its implications on the petitioner's membership status and participation in the election process. The interpretation of the provisions and their application influenced the court's decision to dismiss the petition.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a member of a society, sought inclusion in the final voter list to contest elections. The petitioner had faced expulsion and subsequent reinstatement orders, leading to a dispute over membership and participation in the election process.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's membership status and eligibility for inclusion in the voter list were influenced by the Registrar's orders, the society's by-laws, and the ongoing election process. The court dismissed the petition, citing the petitioner's non-membership status at the time of the voter list publication.
Issues: The issues revolved around the petitioner's membership status, reinstatement orders, and eligibility for inclusion in the voter list for contesting elections.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the petitioner's non-membership status at the time of the voter list publication, influenced by the Registrar's orders and the society's by-laws.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition, citing the petitioner's non-membership status at the time of the voter list publication, and the ongoing election process.
JUDGMENT
1. Petitioner has filed the present petition seeking following relief :-
"(1) That, the petition filed by the petitioner may be allowed and by way of an appropriate writ, direction or order the respondent may be directed to include the name of the petitioner in the final voter list published by the respondent and the petitioner may be permitted to contest the elections.
(2) That, by way of an appropriate writ, direction or order the respondent may be directed to prepare a fresh voter list including the name of all eligible voters before conducting the elections.
(3) That, any other appropriate relief that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted to the petitioner against the respondents.
(4) That, the petitioner may be awarded cost of the petition."
2. According to the petitioner, respondent No.3 is a Society registered under the provisions of M.P. Societies Registration Act, 1973 and he is a valid member of the society. The Managing Committee of the respondent No.3 was elected for the period of three years in the year 2017 in which the petitioner was elected as Vice President. Due to political rivalry amongst the office bearers and the members of the Club, a show cause notice was issued to him levelling various false allegations and thereafter vide order dated 29.06.2017 he was expelled from the membership as well as from the post of Vice President. The petitioner challenged the aforesaid order by way of appeal before the Registrar Firms and Societies. Vide order dated 21.02.2018, the Registrar has quashed the order of expulsion and directed for reinstatement with further direction to conduct an enquiry by following principles of natural justice.
3. After the aforesaid order again vide order dated 28.04.2018 the petitioner has been terminated from the membership as well as from the post of Vice President.
Petitioner preferred an appeal before the Registrar and vide order dated 17.01.2020 the appeal has been allowed with a direction to the respondent No.3 to consider about the membership of the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of Adhiniyam, 1973.
4. Vide notice dated 06.01.2020, the General Secretary of respondent No.3 called the General Body Meeting on 20.01.2020 for deciding the date of election of office bearer. In the said meeting the Chief Election Officer was appointed to conduct the fresh election. Chief Election Officer published election programme in which the date of publication of provisional voter list is 5th February, 2020 and 8th February, 2020 has been fixed for publication of final voter list.
5. The petitioner did not find place his name in the provisional voter list, therefore, he submitted an objection before the Chief Election Officer on 06.02.2020 and when objection was not decided and final voter list was published, he approached this Court by way of present Writ Petition on 22.02.2020. Vide order dated 25.02.2020 this Court has issued notice to the respondent. On 28.02.2020, this Court has permitted the petitioner to submit the nomination form and directed to list today for confirmation of interim relief.
6. Shri Anshuman Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.3 submits that after the order passed by the Registrar on 17.01.2020 the membership of the petitioner has not been restored, therefore, his name was rightly not been included in the voter list. The petitioner has been convicted by the competent Court and he has committed various irregularities, therefore, as per by-laws, his membership was rightly terminated. As per the direction of Registrar the new Body will take action in accordance with law against him and till then he cannot be permitted to participate in the election. Hence, the interim order be not continued and the petition be dismissed.
7. Shri Nimgaonkar submits that the Registrar vide order dated 17.01.2020 has allowed the appeal meaning thereby the order dated 28.04.2018 is
