Allahabad High Court
Ran Pal Singh And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 28 August, 2023
Bench: Kshitij Shailendra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:173592
Court No. - 10
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 23834 of 2023
Petitioner :- Ran Pal Singh And 2 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Kailash Kumar
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Akarsh Dwivedi
Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.
1. Heard Sri Kailash Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents no.1 to 4 and Sri Akarsh Dwivedi, learned counsel representing the respondents no.6 to 8.
2. By means of the present writ petition, an order dated 17.02.2023 issued by the Election Officer has been challenged.
3. I have perused the said order, by which the election result of Satileela Cooperative Housing Society Ltd, Gautam Budh Nagar has been declared.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out various infirmities in the said declaration as well as concerned elections.
5. However, Sri Akarsh Dwivedi, learned counsel for the newly impleaded respondents no.6 to 8 placing reliance upon Rule 50 of U.P. State Co-operative Societies Election Rules, 2014, has raised a preliminary objection to the writ petition saying that the writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has alternative remedy of approaching the Registrar under Section 70 of the U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965. For ready reference Rule 50 of the Rules, 2014 is being reproduced herein below:-
"50.(1) The parties aggrieved by the election of any official or representative of any Co-operative society can file an election suit under section 70, which shall be referred to,-
(a) To the concerned District Magistrate in the case of Primary and Central/District level Co-operative Societies, who shall himself decide the dispute or may appoint any of the Sub Divisional Magistrate under him as Arbitrator or the Chairman of the Arbitration Board as the case may be, in the case of Primary Cooperative Society and in the case of Central/District level Cooperative Societies decide the dispute himself or may appoint any of the Additional District Magistrate under him as Arbitrator or as the Chairman of the Board as the case may be.
(b) The Commission in the case of any State level / apex Co-operative Society which may decide the dispute himself or may appoint any Election Commissioner as Arbitrator or as the Chairman of Arbitration Board.
(2) In regards to election of any co-operative society no objection shall be raised by arbitration or otherwise except on the ground that ?
(a) the election has not been fair by reason that corrupt practice, bribery or undue influence prevailed at the election,
(b) or the result of election has been materially affected,-
(i) by improper acceptance or rejection of any nomination. Or
(ii) by improper acceptance or refusal or rejection of votes or
(iii) by gross failure to comply with the provisions of the Act, the rules or the bye-laws of the Co-operative Society.
Explanation- For the purpose of this rule, corruption, bribery or undue influence shall have the same meaning as assigned to them under section-123 of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951.
(3) A dispute relating to election shall be referred by the aggrieved party within forty five days of the declaration of the result.
(4) Notwithstanding anything in these rules, the applicant filing the election suit shall deposit the fees as follows in the head of account fixed by the State Government and shall enclose the original receipt with the plaint:-
(a) in case of primary cooperative societies- Rs. one thousand.
(b) in case of District/Central cooperative societies - Rs. two thousand
(c) in case of State Level/ Apex Cooperative Societies - Rs. five thousand
Provided that, the suit shall not be accepted if the receipt of fees is not submitted."
6. He has also placed reliance upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court dated 16.12.2020 passed in Writ-C No.20203 of 2020 (Matsya Jivi Sahkari Samiti Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. and 6 others).
7. Answering to the said preliminary objection, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that U.P. Co-operative Societies Rules, 1968 have been amended by U.P. Cooperative Societies (53rd amendment) Rules, 2017 by virtue of which Rules 444-B, 444-C and 444-D have been omitted. He, therefore, submits that the writ petition is maintainable.
8. I have perused the Rules of 2017 and Rules of 2014 and I find that the amended Rules, 2017 do not deal with the Elections Rules, 2014. Moreover, as far as the remedy of reference under Section 70 is concerned, though the proviso attached to sub-section (1) of Section 70 provides that dispute relating to an election under the provisions of the Act or Rules shall not be referred to the Registrar, the said bar is attracted only until results are declared that is to say that remedy of reference is available after declaration of such result, which is apparent from the use of words "until after the declaration of the result of such election".
9. In view of the Rule 50 of Rules, 2014 read with the decision of the Division Bench of this Court, I find that the writ petition is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed only on the ground of alternative remedy.
10. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed permitting the petitioner to avail alternative remedy.
Order Date :- 28.8.2023
AKShukla/-
