Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 1033 Gua
Judgement Date : 17 March, 2021
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010036212021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/1339/2021
THE RANGPUR CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD AND ANR
REP. BY THE CHAIR PERSON OF RANGPUR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY,
CACHAR, ASSAM, R/O- VILL- AND P.O.- GOSSAIPUR PART-III, P.S.-
UDHARBOND, DIST.- CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN- 788030
2: RESHMA PARVIN LASKAR
W/O- IFTIKAR AHMED LASKAR
CHAIRMAN OF RANGPUR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY
GUSSAIPUR
PART-III
P.S.- UDHARBOND
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS
REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY., GOVT. OF ASSAM, CO-OPERATIVE
DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-6
2:THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY
ASSAM
KHANAPARA
GHY-22
3:THE ADDL. REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
ASSAM
KHANAPARA
GHY-22
4:THE ZONAL JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY
CACHAR AT SILCHAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
Page No.# 2/4
5:THE ASSTT. REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY
CACHAR AT SILCHAR
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
6:THE SECRETARY
RANGPUR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.
GOSSAIPUR
P.S.- UDHARBOND
DIST.- CACHAR
(ASSAM)
PIN- 788030
7:SAJUL ISLAM BARBHUYAN
S/O- LT. ANAR ALI BARBHUYAN
R/O-VILL- AND P.O.- GOSSAIPUR PART-III
P.S.- UDHARBOND
DIST.- CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 78803
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M U MAHMUD
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, CO OP
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
ORDER
Date : 17.03.2021
Heard Mr. M. U. Mahmud, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, who submits that the letter dated 07.01.2021 issued by the In-Charge Additional Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (G) should be set aside, in as much as, the respondent/authorities are now trying to restore the Chairmanship of the respondent no.7 in respect of the Rangpur Co-Operative Society Ltd., in terms of the said letter. He submits that as the respondent no.7 has been removed from the Chairmanship of the society, in terms of Section 43 (3) of the Assam Co- Operative Societies Act, 2007, the respondent no. 7 cannot be eligible to hold the office of the Chairman for a period of 3 years from the date of his removal, which in this case is Page No.# 3/4
21.08.2019.
Mr. S. K. Talukdar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/department submits that the writ petition is premature. He further submits that the petitioner cannot be said to be an aggrieved party, as no order or action has been taken by the respondents on the basis of the impugned letter dated 07.01.2021, which has violated the legal or fundamental rights of the petitioners.
I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.
The impugned letter dated 07.01.2021 issued by the In-Charge Additional Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (G), Assam, Khanapara, Guwahati-22 and addressed to the Assistant Registrar of Co-Operative Societies, Silchar is as follows:-
"Sub: Legal views in respect of entitlement of Sri Sajal Islam Barbhuiya, erstwhile Chairman of Rongpur C. S. Ltd. In view of order dated 20.11.2020 of the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court passed in WP (C) No. 5786/2019, reviving the order dated 02.08.2019 of the ARCS, Silchar.
Ref: No. Co-op-SC/2020/25, dated 05.01.2021, received from Sravan Kr. Talukdar, Advocate, Standing Counsel, Cooperation Department.
Sir, With reference to the subject cited above, I am directed to furnish herewith a copy of the views dated 05.01.2021 received from Sravan Kr. Talukdar, Advocate, Standing Counsel, Cooperation Department in the matter of Rongpur C.S. Ltd. And request you to take necessary action as per advice of the Standing Counsel with intimation to this office.
This has the approval of the Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Assam. "
On perusal of the above impugned letter dated 07.01.2021, this Court is of the view Page No.# 4/4
that as on date no right of the petitioner has been violated by the above letter. Further no action has been taken by any person or authority in pursuance to the above letter, which prejudices the rights of the petitioners. Further, this court does not find any infirmity with legal views being given in respect of various orders issued by different authorities. Until and unless some legal right is violated, a person cannot be said to be an aggrieved person, in terms of the Judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan Vs State of Maharashtra & Ors reported in (2013) 4 SCC 465.
In view of the above reasons, the writ petition is dismissed.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!