Dismissed

Alok Kumar Bhatiya v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC3 May 2018WRIC/16099/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged an order discarding management committee elections and appointing a controller. Court held that pendency of membership dispute under Section 25(1) does not impede elections. Petitioner failed to prove enrollment of life members post-2012. Petition dismissed on merit; other aspects left open.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; validity of impugned order aspects regarding discarded elections and appointment of controller left open.

Alok Kumar Bhatiya Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others — Cooperative Societies | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 19

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 16099 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Alok Kumar Bhatiya Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Singh Bishen,Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mangla Prasad Rai

¶5

Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.

¶6

By means of instant writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 5.12.2017 passed by Regional Level committee discarding elections dated 7.7.2017 and 27.7.2017 of the Committee of Management of Shiksha Niketan Inter College, Obra, Sonebhadra. By the same order, District Basic Education Officer, Sonebhadra has been appointed as Authorised Controller and District Inspector of Schools, Sonebhadra has been directed to conduct elections from life members, who participated in the election held in the year 2012 and from valid and eligible members of the General Body in accordance with the Scheme of Administration.

¶7

The petitioner, who claims himself to be a permanent member, though no such category of member is contemplated under the Scheme of Administration, has challenged the order on the ground that life members enrolled up to the election held in 2012 alone have been permitted to participate in the election. He further submitted that the dispute relating to membership is pending before the Prescribed Authority under Section 25(1) of the Act, and therefore, unless that dispute is decided, election should not be held.

¶8

On being asked by the Court as to whether any life member was enrolled after the year 2012, he is unable to respond to the query of the Court, nor could refer to any assertion in the writ petition, wherein the petitioner has set up a case that life members were enrolled after the year 2012.

¶9

In respect of the proceedings pending before the Prescribed Authority, the same are in relation to determination of the election dispute of the Managing Committee of the Society under Section

¶10

25(1) of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, as is evident from the order of reference dated 2.9.2016. Indisputably, the Managing Committee of the Institution is constituted in accordance with the approved Scheme of Administration, therefore, in the opinion of the Court, mere pendency of reference under Section 25(1) of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, would not be an impediment in proceeding to hold election of the Committee of Management or in ascertaining the Electoral College in accordance with the provisions of the Scheme of Administration.

¶11

The writ petition lacks merit and is dismissed.

¶12

However, it is clarified that this Court has not examined the validity of the impugned order in so far as it discards both set of elections or the order to the extent it seeks to appoint an Authorised Controller, as that part of the order is not under challenge. These issues, if raised, are left open for decision in appropriate proceedings.

¶13

(Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.)

¶14

Order Date :- 3.5.2018 AM/-

Alok Kumar Bhatiya v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alok Kumar Bhatiya v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dinesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Mahipal Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

C/M Shri Damodar Higher Secondary School and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

C/M Tyagi Vidya Sabha and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

C/M Sri Rajeshwari Vidya Mandir and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Tyagi Inter College, Enchwara and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others