Munesh Chandra Pachauri vs State Of U.P. & Others
2012 Latest Caselaw 5785 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 21
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 61830 of 2012
 

 
Petitioner :- Munesh Chandra Pachauri
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Tripathi B.G. Bhai,Smt. Anita Tripathi
 
Respondent Counsel :- C. S. C.
 

 
Hon'ble Satya Poot Mehrotra,J.

Hon'ble Het Singh Yadav,J.

    Supplementary affidavit has been filed today. Let the same be placed on record.

    We have heard Shri Tripathi B.G. Bhai, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents, and perused the record.

    The present Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, interalia, praying for quashing the proceedings of the election of the Cooperative Society in question on the ground that the publication of the provisional electoral constituency list was not done in accordance with the relevant provisions of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 and the U.P.Cooperative Societies Rules, 1968 framed thereunder.

    From a perusal of  the Writ Petition, the annexures thereto as well as the supplementary affidavit and the annexures thereto, it is evident that the election process has already started. In the circumstances, we are not inclined to exercise our Writ Jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the matter so as to hinder the on-going election process.

    Rule 444 C of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Rules, 1968 framed under the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 lays down as under:

"444-C. (1) The election in a co-operative society shall not be called in question either by arbitration or otherwise except on the ground that -

    (a) the election has not been a fair election by reasons that corrupt practice, bribery or undue influence has extensively prevailed at the election, or

    (b) the result of the election has been materially affected -

    (i) by improper acceptance or rejection of any nomination, or

    (ii) by improper reception, refusal or rejection of voters, or

    (iii) by gross failure to comply with the provisions of the Act, the rules or the bye-laws of the society.

    Explanation.- For the purpose of this rule corruption, bribery or undue influence shall have the meaning assigned to each under Section 123 of the Representation of People Act, 1951.

    (2) A dispute relating to election shall be preferred by the aggrieved party within forty-five days of the declaration of the result."

    In view of the provisions of the above-quoted Rule, it is evident that after conclusion of the election, it will be open to the petitioner to challenge the election in the Cooperative Society on the grounds mentioned in the aforesaid Rule.

    Proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 70 of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 shows that dispute relating to an election may be referred to the Registrar after the declaration of the result of such election.

    In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the Writ Petition filed by the petitioner is liable to be dismissed, and the same is accordingly dismissed.

Order Date :- 29.11.2012

safi