Dismissed

Panna Lal Singh Paraste v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC2 Jul 2014WPS/2858/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition regarding alleged illegal removal as a manager of a cooperative society, the petitioners cited the Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies Act. The single judge discharged jurisdiction noting the existence of an alternative remedy under Section 64 of the Act, dismissing the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed based on existence of alternative remedy under Section 64 of the Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies Act, 1960.

Panna Lal Singh Paraste Vs State Of Chhattisgarh… — Cooperative Societies | Chhattisgarh HC (2014)

¶1

1.°^

¶2

IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) WRIT PETITIONJS1 Np^ ^--^S^ Qp 2014 .. g s.w

¶3

PETITIONER

¶4

?^
•••"^-A ...^^t"" •••'' ciy.-'"
^>-"
RESPONDENTS

¶5

Panna Lal Singh Paraste, son of Tulsi Ram Singh, aged about 48 Years, R/o. ViUage Kanjiya, TahsU and P.S. Bharatpur, Civil and Revenue District Koriya (C.G.), !. )

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

State of Chhattisgarh,

¶8

Through: The Secretary - Forest Departinent, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Raipur (C.G.)

¶9

f Divisional Forest Officer, Manendragarh, Disti-ict Koriya (C.G.)

¶10

Managing Director, Zila Vanopaj Sahkari Sangh Maryadit, Manendragarh, District Koriya

¶11

(C.G.),

¶12

¶13

Lok Nath son of Son Sai, aged \ about 50 years, working as a Manager, Vanopaj Samifi Kanjiya, District Koriya (C.G.),

¶14

WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

¶15

¶16

¶17

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR

¶18

WRIT PETITION IS) N0.2858 OF 2014

¶19

PETITIONER

¶20

Panna Lal Singh Paraste

¶21

Versus

¶22

RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh & Others

¶23

(Writ Petition underArticle 226 of the Constitution of India)

¶24

Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra, J.

¶25

Present:Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Shashank Thakur, Govt. Adv. for the State.

¶26

ORDER (OPEN COURT^

¶27

(Passed on this 2nd day ofJuly, 2014)

¶28

hleard learned counsel for the parties.

¶29

¶30

.Petitioner is raising a dispute regarding his illegal oral removal as Manager

¶31

by the respondent No.3, which is admittedly a Cooperative Society

¶32

registered under the provisions of the Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (for short 'the Act, 1960'). Petitioner has an alternative remedy of raising dispute under Section 64 oftheAct, 1960.

¶33

In view of existence of alternative remedv, this Court is not inclined to

¶34

entertain this petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is disrrtissed. hlowever, it Is made clear that if the petitioner raises a dispufe, the same shall be disposed of by the concerned authority, in accordance withlaw and on its

¶35

own merits, as early as possible.

¶36

Gowri

¶37

Sd/1-
prashantK»m«Mishra
Judge

Panna Lal Singh Paraste v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Panna Lal Singh Paraste v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

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

Amrit Lal Bariha and Anr. Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Dilip Acharya Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Deeplal Janghela Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

C.G.Infrastructure Dev.Corporation Vs Niman Khalkho and Ors.

Shivchran Suryawansi Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

M/s Dayalal Meghji And Company Vs Smt.kamla Bai And Ors.