IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 4548 of 2024 a/w CWP No. 10551 of 2024 Reserved on : 01.07.2025 Decided on : 30.07.2025

1. CWP No. 4548 of 2024 The Mehta Transport Co-operative Society and others.

…Petitioners Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh and others.

…Respondents

2. CWP No. 10551 of 2024 The Mehta Co-operative Society Branch office, Mamoor.

…Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others.

…Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge Whether approved for reporting?¹ Yes For the petitioners : Mr. Amar Vivek Aggarwal, Advocate (through V.C.), with Ms. Aruna Chauhan, Advocate, in both petitions.

For the respondents : Mr. Rajpal Thakur, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 & 2, in CWP No. 4548 of 2024 and for respondent No.1 to 3, in CWP No. 10551 of

2024.

1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

Mr. Sudhir Thakur, Senior Advoate, with Mr. Somesh Sharma, Advocate, for respondents No.3 to 9, in CWP No. 4548 of 2024 and for respondents No.4 to 10, in CWP No. 10551 of 2024.

Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral CWP No. 4548 of 2024 By way of writ petition, i.e., CWP No. 4548 of 2024, the petitioners primarily are seeking the quashing of order dated 04.05.2024, passed by respondent No.1, in Appeal No. 02 of 2024, titled Meenakshi Mehta & Ors. Vs. Mehta Transport Cooperative Societies & Ors. The other reliefs prayed for in the writ petition are not being gone into by the Court, as arguments were not addressed qua the said reliefs and the parties restricted their contentions vis-a-vis the legality of order dated

04.05.2024.

2. Along-with present petition, CWP No. 10551 of 2024 was also listed and parties agreed that the fate of the said writ petition would depend upon the outcome of the present writ petition and, therefore, no independent arguments are addressed in the said writ petition.

3. This Court also would like to observe at this stage itself that as this Court has been called upon to go into the legality of the order that has been passed by the Secretary, Corporation, it has restricted itself to the exercise of the power of judicial review and heard the parties strictly on the legality of said order within the parameters of the scope of judicial review of a quasi-judicial order.

4. The Authority has passed the impugned order in compliance to the order(s) passed by this Court in cases mentioned in theu impugned order itself, which cases were disposed of oby this Court on 11.01.2024. Said order is being quotedC hereinbelow for ready reference:-

“By way of CWP No.3020 of 2018, titled as hMeenakshi Mehta and others versus the Mehta Cooperative Transport Society and others, the petitioners therein have prayed for the following reliefs:-

i i) “Directing the Assistant Registrar Cooperative Society and Returning Officer to remove from the voter list respondents No.6 to

18, as per annexure A-8.

ii) Directing the Assistant Registrar Cooperative Society and Returning Officer not to conduct any election before 23.03.2020 in compliance of order dated 25.07.2018.

iii) That in case the Hon'ble Court comes to the conclusion that the election be conducted then the same be conducted on the basics of the voter list as prepared for election on 23.05.2015 and new election programme be framed and the petitioners may be. allowed to participate in the election.

iv) Declaring members of the Society enrolled after 23.03.2015 by way of various resolutions as illegal ando in contravention to the Cooperative Society Acts and rules.

v) Directing the Assistant Registrar Cooperrative Society/authorities concerned to huold free and fair inquiry for fuzzing, embezzling and forging the records by respondent No.5 which is pending before the CArbitrator under section 72.”

2. By way of CWP No.622 of 2020, titled as Nirmla Mehta and others versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, the petitioners therein have prayed for the g following reliefs:-

“a) The impugned Orders vide No 6-27/2017-

H C