Allahabad High Court
Aftab Ahmad vs State Of U.P. Thru Secy. And Others on 20 November, 2012
Bench: Satya Poot Mehrotra, Het Singh Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 21
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 41555 of 2012
Petitioner :- Aftab Ahmad
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Secy. And Others
Petitioner Counsel :- U.K. Saxena,Vikas Srivastava
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Satya Poot Mehrotra,J.
Hon'ble Het Singh Yadav,J.
The present Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter-alia, praying for quashing the Order dated 27th July, 2012 (Annexure 5 to the Writ Petition).
It appears that by the Order dated 6th September, 2011, an Interim Committee of Management had been constituted under Rule 438 of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Rules, 1968 framed under the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 for managing the affairs of Ghaziabad Urban Cooperative Bank Limited (respondent no.4).
Due to change in the circumstances, another Interim Committee of Management was constituted by the Order dated 22nd June, 2012 (Annexure 2 to the Writ Petition) issued by the Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, U.P., Meerut Division, Meerut, under Rule 438 of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Rules, 1968.
By the Order dated 12th July, 2012 (Annexure 3 to the Writ Petition) issued by the Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Meerut Division, Meerut, the Order dated 22nd June, 2012 was amended, and the Interim Committee of Management was reconstituted wherein the petitioner was included as one of the members of the said Committee.
Subsequently, by the Order dated 27th July, 2012 (Annexure 5 to the Writ Petition), the Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Meerut Division, Meerut amended the said Order dated 12th July, 2012 and reconstituted the Interim Committee of Management wherein the petitioner was not included as one of the members.
The petitioner has, thereupon, filed the present Writ Petition seeking the reliefs, as mentioned above.
We have heard Shri Rajesh Datt Pandey, holding brief for Shri U.K. Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 1 to 3 and Shri Anirudh Kumar Dwivedi, holding brief for Shri K.N. Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4, and perused the record.
It is submitted by Shri Rajesh Datt Pandey, holding brief for Shri U.K. Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been excluded from the membership of the Interim Committee of Management as he made a Complaint against the Secretary of Ghaziabad Urban Cooperative Bank Limited (respondent no.4).
We have considered the submission made by Shri Rajesh Datt Pandey, holding brief for Shri U.K. Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioner.
A perusal of the copy of the Complaint allegedly made by the petitioner against the Secretary of Ghaziabad Urban Cooperative Bank Limited (respondent no.4), annexed as Annexure 4 to the Writ Petition, shows that the same does not bear any date on which the same was made. No date is indicated in paragraph 11 of the Writ Petition in this regard.
A perusal of the alleged Complaint shows that certain News Paper cuttings were enclosed with the said Complaint. However, there is nothing to indicate that on account of the said Complaint, the Order dated 27th July, 2012 was issued in regard to reconstitution of the Interim Committee of Management. Nothing has been brought to the notice of the Court on behalf of the petitioner to show that the Order dated 27th July, 2012 was issued on account of the Complaint allegedly made by the petitioner against the Secretary of Ghaziabad Urban Cooperative Bank Limited (respondent no.4).
No illegality or infirmity has been shown in the said Order dated 27th July, 2012. The Writ Petition filed by the petitioner lacks merits, and the same is liable to be dismissed.
The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 20.11.2012
Ajeet...
