Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Indrajeet Singh vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:29895) on 10 July, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:29895]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11891/2025
Indrajeet Singh S/o Laluram, aged about 54 Years, resident of
27 Ps, Shriganganagar (Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan, through Registrar, Co-Operative
Societies, Nehru Sahkar Bhawan, 22 Godawn, Jaipur.
2. Co-Operative Election Authority, State Co-Operative
Election Authority, 10 B - Sansthat Shetra, Raisem
Bhawan, Jhalana Dungri, Jaipur (Raj.).
3. Deputy Registrar, Co-Operative Societies, Shriganganagar,
Sahkar Bhawan, 19 A, Ashok Nagar, Shriganganagar
(Raj.).
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tej Singh Rathore
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arpit Samariya for
Mr. N.S. Rathore, AAG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN
Order
10/07/2025
1. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the relief
sought in the present writ petition is covered by the decision of a
Co-ordinate Bench of this Court dated 15.03.2021 passed in S.B.
Civil Writ Petition No. 5533/2020 (Sultana Kray Vikray
Sahakari Samiti Ltd. Vs. Sate of Rajasthan & Ors.) and batch
of petitions. Operative portion of the said order reads as under:
"13. Having regard to the submissions made, this Court
is of the view that the appointment of Administrator in
exercise of power under Section 30(1)(c) of the Act of
2001, per se cannot be faulted with, if the term of office
has expired.
14. It has already been stated by learned Additional
Advocate General that State is in the process of holding
elections. The State has also given undertaking in some
[2025:RJ-JD:29895] (2 of 3) [CW-11891/2025]
cases that no Administrator shall be appointed. In other
cases State has been restrained from appointing
Administrators.
15. Executives or members of the Board are/were not at
fault. The State can also not be blamed for not holding
the elections in wake of spread of Pandemic COVID-19.
16. But the situation is not as demanding as it was
during July, 2020. Election of Panchayats and
Municipalities have been held. It is the bounden duty of
the State to ensure autonomy of the cooperative
societies and holding of election is a fundamental part of
the autonomy.
17. On Court's query, Mr. Beniwal informed that the
State will need at least six months' time to hold
elections of all the societies, though the Court wanted to
give only three months' time.
18. This Court has only stayed appointment of
Administrator(s). There was no injunction on holding of
elections. As a matter of fact, the State ought to have
initiated the process of election.
19. Instead of discharging its statutory duty, the State
has moved application under Article 226(3) of the
Constitution with a prayer to vacate the interim order,
obviously with a view to appoint Administrator(s).
20. Hence, permitting the respondents to appoint
Administrator, at this stage, given the fact that neither
elections have been held, nor concrete steps have still
been taken, would be like giving premium to the State
authorities for their inaction.
21. In light of provisions contained in Article 243(zk),
243(zl) of the Constitution of India and following the
judgment of Division Bench of this Court in the case of
Shri Bhanwarlal Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.; D.B. Civil Writ
Petition No.13859/2016, all these writ petitions are
disposed of with the directions to the State to hold the
elections of the petitioner-societies as early as possible,
however, in any case not later than six months from
today.
22. Till the elections are held, the present Board of
Directors or member of Executive Committee of
petitioner societies shall continue to hold office(s), if
they do not acquire any disqualification.
23. It is further directed that the Board of Directors will
not take any policy decision in the period interregnum.
In case any such exigency arises, the same shall be
[2025:RJ-JD:29895] (3 of 3) [CW-11891/2025]
taken only after due ratification by the Registrar,
Cooperative Society.
24. Needless to observe that the present order has been
passed in peculiar situation, as the State was unable to
hold the elections of the petitioner societies on account
of onslaught of Pandemic - COVID-19.
25. All the stay petitions are also disposed of
accordingly."
2. In light of the agreement of learned counsel for both the
parties with regard to applicability of the order dated 15.03.2021
passed in the case of Sultana Kray Vikray Sahakari Samiti Ltd.
(supra), the present writ petition is also disposed of in the same
terms.
3. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(MUNNURI LAXMAN),J
237-Dharmendra Rakhecha/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
