Dismissed

Prashant Kumar Tyagi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC6 Apr 2023WRIC/11291/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition maintaining that an efficacious alternative remedy was available to the petitioners under the U.P. State Co-operative Societies Election Rules 2014. Upon raising the preliminary objection, the petitioners withdrew the petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed as not pressed, with leave to assail the election validity under the Rules 2014.

Prashant Kumar Tyagi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Election Law | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 40

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11291 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Prashant Kumar Tyagi And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jagdev Singh,Chandra Bhusan Kushwaha Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mahesh Narayan Mishra,Narendra Kumar Giri

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Manjive Shukla,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Narendra Kumar Giri, learned Standing Counsel for the State Respondent and Shri Mahesh Narayan Mishra, learned counsel for respondent no.4.

¶6

The present writ petition is preferred by the petitioners who want to contest Election for the post of Director of the Respondent No. 4 Society i.e. Ratangarh Kishan Sewa Sahkari Samiti Ltd, Ratangarh, District Bijnor which is a primary Society and its 9 members to be elected as Directors. By means of present writ petition following reliefs have been prayed for:-

¶7

"i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned corrigendum published on 11.03.2023 in daily newspaper, Hindustan Times under the signature of Respondent No. 3, so far as it relates to the Respondent No. 4 Society.

¶8

ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to give effect to the corrigendum dated 11.03.2023 and conduct the Election process as per the notification dated 05.03.2023."

¶9

At the very outset, Shri Narendra Kumar Giri, learned Standing Counsel for the State Respondent and Shri Mahesh Narayan Mishra, learned counsel for respondent no.4 raised preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the Writ Petition. Reliance has been placed reliance upon the order passed in Chandra Bhushan Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, Writ C No. 8059 of 2023 dated 16.03.2023 and order passed in Navik Jal Majdoor Matsys Jivi Shakari Samiti Limited And Another Vs. State of U.P. And Others, Writ-C No. 3569 of 2018 dated 25.01.2018. It is submitted that the election has already been conducted, hence the present Writ Petition is not maintainable. It is also submitted that in case petitioners are aggrieved with

¶10

the outcome of the result of the election, the efficacious remedy is available to them to file a suit as is provided under Chapter VII Rule 50(1) of the U.P. State Co-operative Societies Election Rules 2014 (in brevity the 'Rules 2014').

¶11

Once an objection is being raised, we have proceeded to examine the record in question as well as the aforesaid Rule. We are of the considered opinion that once the efficacious alternative remedy is available to the petitioners, there is no reason or occasion to bypass the statutory forum and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

¶12

Once the Court has indicated its mind in negative, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he does not want to press the present writ petition and as such, the same may be dismissed as not pressed with leave to assail the validity of aforesaid election as per provision contained under Rules 2014.

¶13

Prayer made is allowed.

¶14

The writ petition is dismissed as not pressed with aforesaid leave.

¶15

Order Date :- 6.4.2023 A. Mandhani

¶16

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK MANDHANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Prashant Kumar Tyagi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prashant Kumar Tyagi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shiv Dutt Sharma Vs Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh and Another

Nivedita Shahi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Anil Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shakuntla Devi Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Kashmir Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Deepak Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others