Disposed

Vinod Singh and 7 Others v. State of U.P. and 13 Others

Allahabad HC9 Jul 2020WRIC/8541/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged an order by the Assistant Registrar finalizing a list of nine new members and directing fresh elections. The court directed the petitioners to raise objections against the elections before the Registrar, noting recognition must follow resolution of disputes.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; petitioners directed to raise objections regarding the elections before the Assistant Registrar.

Vinod Singh and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and 13… — Cooperative Societies | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 36

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8541 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Vinod Singh And 7 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 13 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Deepak Kumar,Prabhakar Awasthi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Birendra Kumar Srivastava (Senior Adv.),Shashi Kant Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶5

The order passed by the Assistant Registrar Firm, Societies and Chits dated 15.11.2019 is assailed in this petition. By this order, the Assistant Registrar has finalised the list of general body and has directed fresh elections to be conducted in terms of Section 25 (2) of the Societies Registration Act,1860 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1860'). This order also determine as to who are those nine new members who have inducted in the Society on 20.5.2018.

¶6

The order of Assistant Registrar is assailed by Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners were inducted as members on 20.5.2018 but as the manager later lost confidence of the general body as such he has inserted names of nine new members who were never enrolled as members.

¶7

Sri B.K. Srivastava, learned senior counsel, assisted by Sri S.K. Srivatava appearing for the respondent nos. 3 & 4, on the other hand, submits that the original records of proceedings dated 20.5.2018 have been produced by the respondents before the Assistant Registrar and the contention that the petitioners were enrolled as members is found contrary to it. It is pointed out that the petitioners have only produced photocopy of the proceedings and the Assistant Registrar has, therefore, rightly ignored it. In reply Sri Awasthi states that the original proceedings are with the manager and if the same is produced before the Court, the issue would be resolved.

¶8

Sri Pranav Ojha, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel has appeared for the State authorities and has opposed the prayer made in the writ petition.

¶9

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that the bone of contention between the parties is with regard to correctness of the proceedings dated 20.5.2018, which would also demonstrate as to who are the nine new members who have inducted in such proceedings. It is not in issue that pursuant to the order of Assistant Registrar, fresh elections have been

¶10

conducted under Section 25 (2) of the Act of 1860 but the Assistant Registrar is yet to recognise the list of office bearers.

¶11

Since fresh elections have already been conducted and are yet to be recognised, it would be open for the petitioners to raise their objections against it before the Assistant Registrar and the same shall be dealt with before recognising the elections conducted under Section 25 (2) of the Act, of 1860. In the event the Assistant Registrar finds that there is a bonafide doubt or dispute in respect of the elections conducted under Section 25 (2) of the Act of 1860, he shall refer the matter to the Prescribed Authority or else. Otherwise he shall proceed to pass necessary orders, in accordance with law. The required proceedings, in that regard, would be concluded within a period of three months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order.

¶12

With the aforesaid observations/ directions, writ petition stands disposed of.

¶13

Order Date :- 9.7.2020 n.u.

Vinod Singh and 7 Others v. State of U.P. and 13 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Singh and 7 Others v. State of U.P. and 13 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

Ashok Kumar Vs State of U P and 4 Others

Sadhu Ram and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Vijay Narain Tiwari Vs State Bank of India and Another

Ashok Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ashutosh Vs Central Board of Secondary Education and 4 Others

Gunjan Chaudhary Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others