Disposed

Nawal Kishor v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC4 Dec 2018WRIC/39701/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of this writ petition by directing the Registrar of Industrial Cooperative Societies to decide the petitioner's representation within three months, ensuring the alleged respondents receive a hearing. The court expressly stated it did not adjudicate the claim on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Registrar to decide pending representation within three months after giving hearing to respondents.

Nawal Kishor Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others — Cooperative Societies | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 39

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 39701 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Nawal Kishor Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vivek Shandilya Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Santosh Kumar Tripathi

¶4

Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Vivek Shandilya, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Santosh Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondents no.3 & 4 and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no.1, 2 & 5.

¶6

The petitioner in the writ petition is alleging that the respondents no.6 & 7 have illegally got themselves elected as President and Secretary of the Cooperative Society known as Kambal Udyog Sahkari Samiti Limited, Jhansi and are disposing of some lands mentioned in the relief. In respect of his claim the petitioner is stated to have preferred a representation before the respondent no.2, Registrar, Industrial Cooperative Societies, U.P. Kanpur on 08.09.2018 vide registered post dated 10.09.2018, copy of which has been filed as Annexure-11 to the writ petition.

¶7

No useful purpose would be served by keeping this writ petition pending.

¶8

This writ petition is, therefore, disposed of with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties with a direction to the respondent no.2 Registrar, Industrial Cooperative Societies, U.P. Kanpur to consider and decide the petitioner's pending representation dated 08.09.2018, Annexure-11 to the writ petition in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order is received in his office.

¶9

The petitioner shall also provide a copy of the representation dated 08.09.2018 alongwith the certified copy of this order to the respondent no.2.

¶10

Needless to say before any orders are passed the respondent no.2 shall also give an opportunity of hearing to the respondents no.6 & 7.

¶11

It is made clear that the Court has not adjudicated the claim of the petitioner on merits.

¶12

Order Date :- 4.12.2018 N Tiwari

Nawal Kishor v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nawal Kishor 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Others

Smt. Sushma Sachan Vs State of U.P. and Others

Sarita Gupta Vs Zonal Manager L.I.C. of India and Ors.

Furmaan Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Munne Khan and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vikas Tiwari Vs Union of India and 2 Others