Shri Santan Dharma Sabha (Regd) vs State Of Haryana And Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 9989 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Shri Santan Dharma Sabha (Regd) vs State Of Haryana And Others on 8 May, 2024

Bench: Anupinder Singh Grewal, Kirti Singh

ee ities

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigar

110 LPA-1054-2024 (O & M)
Date of Decision: May 08, 2024

SHRI SANTAN DHARMA SABHA(REGD.) --__...... APPELLANT
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS .... RESPONDENTS

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH

Present: Dr. Pankaj Nanhera, Advocate and
Mr. Rahul Gautam, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Anant Kataria, DAG, Haryana.
oie 2 oe 2k

ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J (ORAL)

The appellant has challenged the interim order dated 04.04.2024 passed by learned Single Judge whereby its application for stay of the election result has been dismissed.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant/Society submits that private respondents No.4 to 9 had preferred a writ petition bearing CWP No.27972- 2023, challenging the membership of a Cooperative Society, although there is an alternative remedy provided in Section 79 of the Haryana Registration and Regulation of Societies Act, 2012. He, therefore, submits that the learned Single Judge has erroneously passed the impugned order which has caused prejudice to the appellant as the election result ought to have been stayed otherwise those who are not even members of the Society had participated in the process and would now be in the governing body. In support of his

submission, he has relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case

AMIT KAUNDAL 2024.05.14 18:43

| attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Chandigarh

LPA-1054-2024 (O&M) -2-

of Nawal Ray versus Umesh Kumar and Ors, Civil Appeal No.5312 of 2024

(Arising out of SLP (Civil) No.3148/2023).

3. Heard.

4. The appellant/Society has challenged the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge. The writ petition is pending adjudication before the Single Bench and at the time of passing of the interim order, the appellant had not even filed reply to the writ petition. We, therefore, find that the instant LPA is premature. Even otherwise, it is a settled law that availability of an alternative remedy is not an absolute bar for exercising writ jurisdiction. In the interim order, reference has been made to the order passed on 13.12.2023 whereby the declaration of the election result was subject to final outcome of the writ petition. All these issues are pending adjudication before the Single Bench. Therefore, we do not find any good ground to interfere in the interim

order passed by the learned Single Judge and the appeal stands dismissed.

(ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL)

JUDGE (KIRTI SINGH) JUDGE May 08, 2024 A.Kaundal Whether speaking/ reasoned: Yes/No

Whether Reportable : Yes/No

AMIT KAUNDAL 2024.05.14 18:43

| attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh