Dismissed

MD Abdul Khalek v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC9 Apr 2018WA/92/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court dismissed a writ appeal challenging the publication of a voters' list for a cooperative society election. The court held that the Registrar had provided adequate opportunity to raise objections, which the appellant failed to avail, rendering the appeal devoid of merit.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal challenging the voters' list and election process was dismissed.

MD Abdul Khalek Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors. — Company and Corporate | Gauhati HC (2018)

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010067872018

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WA 92/2018

¶5

1:MD ABDUL KHALEK

¶6

AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, S/O LATE MUZAFFAR ALI, R/O VILL. NELLIE, P.O. AND P.S. JAGIROAD, DIST. MORIGAON, ASSAM, PIN 782105

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, COOPERATION DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6

¶9

2:THE PRINCIPAL SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM COOPERATION DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 3:THE REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES ASSAM KHANAPARA GUWAHATI-22 4:THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES NAGAON ASSAM PIN 782001 5:THE ASSTT. REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES MORIGAON ASSAM PIN 782105 6:THE ELECTION OFFICER CUM RETURNING SILCHANG S.S. LTD. C/O ASSTT. REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES MORIGAON

Page No.# 2/5

ASSAM

PIN 78210

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M U MONDAL

¶14

Advocate for the Respondent : DR. B AHMED

¶15

BEFORE

¶16

HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

¶17

Date : 09-04-2018

¶18

JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)

¶19

(AM Bujor Barua, J.)

¶20

Heard Mr. D Das, learned senior counsel for the appellant as well as Dr. B Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, in the Cooperation Department of the Govt. of Assam.

¶21

The present appeal is against the Judgment and Order dated 21.03.2018 of the learned Single Judge in WP(C)No.1561/2018, whereby the writ petition preferred against the order dated 03.03.2018 of the Registrar of Cooperative Societies was dismissed.

¶22

The appellant had preferred an earlier writ petition being WP(C)No.486/2018 on the premises that although an appeal was filed before the Registrar of Cooperative Societies Assam on 27.11.2017 assailing the validity of the voters’ list in respect of Silsang Samabai Samity Ltd., but a due consideration was not given to the appeal. Accordingly, by the order dated 07.02.2018, the Registrar of Cooperative Societies was directed to consider the grievances raised in the said appeal dated 27.11.2017 by passing a speaking order thereof, after giving a due opportunity of being heard to the interested parties. It was further observed that since there was already a direction of the Court for taking necessary steps to hold the AGM at an early date, the Registrar may expedite the process of disposal of the

¶23

Page No.# 3/5

¶24

appeal.

¶25

Consequent thereof, the order dated 03.03.2018 was passed by the Registrar. In the said order the earlier order of this Court dated 03.08.2017 in WP(C)No.4204/2017, WP(C) No.4107/2017, WP(C) No.4042/2017 and WP(C) No.4335/2017 was also considered by which the Registrar was required to issue an order appointing an Election Officer for the purpose of holding the AGM of the Society within 3(three) days thereof, and, thereupon, the Election Officer to issue a notice within 7 days inviting objections for correction of the voters’ list, with a further direction that the correction of the voters’ list be done within 3(three) weeks from the date of issuance of the notice and, thereafter, a status report be submitted before the Court by the next date fixed.

¶26

The order of 03.03.2018 also records that the appellant Abdul Khaleque had stated that the voters’ list which were prepared during his tenure in office, including the list prepared during the year 2017, were in order, and that he has no objection against such voters’ list. It is also recorded that the appellant Abdul Khaleque had stated before the Registrar that the voters’ list prepared in the year 2017 by the Board of Directors of which he was the Chairman had 5454 number of members, which was in excess of the 5000 members prescribed by the by-laws. Consequently, the order of 03.03.2018 concludes as follows:

¶27

“Considering the arguments of both Election Officer Sri Uttam Sinha and Abdul Khaleque, the voters list which has been prepared by the Election/Returning Officer as per Section 41(1), after signing by the Secretary, may be published and hung for display, alongwith adequate publicity within 10^th March 2018. Further claims and objections will be entertained and disposed by 20^th March 2018. The Election programme will be drawn by the Returning Officer, so as to complete the Election process by 15^th April 2018. If the Secretary Shri Shahjahan Ali further non-cooperates, the ARCS Morigaon will have the liberty to use the services of Sri Paresh Deka, Assistant Secretary so that the new Board is installed as per law immediately after 15^th April 2018.”

¶28

Page No.# 4/5

¶29

From the said conclusion of 03.03.2018, it can be noticed that although the voters’ list was directed to be published on or before 10.03.2018, but a further opportunity was given by providing that claims and objections against the voters’ list would be entertained and disposed of by 20.03.2018.

¶30

In the writ petition being WP(C)No.1561/2018, the order dated 03.03.2018 was assailed on the ground that the voters’ list so published contain the names of several ineligible voters, including some voters, who were dead in the meantime. The said contention of the petitioner was rejected by the Judgment and Order dated 21.03.2018 by arriving at a conclusion that the appellant himself had stated before the Registrar that some of such objectionable voters’ were included in the voters’ list prepared during his tenure as the Chairman of the Board of Directors. Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed on the ground that equitable jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ought not to be invoked at the instance of the appellant in the given factual matrix.

¶31

In the appeal the only ground urged upon by Mr. D Das, learned senior counsel is that the voters’ list so published still contains many ineligible voters, including some voters who are already dead and to that extent the learned senior counsel refers to a list of such dead voters whose names are stated to be included in the voters’ list. It is the further contention that the AGM/Election being scheduled on 19.04.2018, the same would stand vitiated in the event, the voters’ list does not stand corrected.

¶32

As already noted the order of 03.03.2018 had clearly provided that the voters’ list be published on or before 10.03.2018, and in the event, there are any further grievances as regards the voters’ list, such claims and objections would be entertained and disposed of upto 20.03.2018. Neither in the writ appeal nor in the writ petition, any such representation/complaint had been brought to the notice of the Court, by which the appellant had raised a claim or objection against an incorrect voters’ list on or before 20.03.2018.

¶33

Page No.# 5/5

¶34

In such view of the matter, this Court does not find any infirmity either in the Judgment and Order dated 21.03.2018 in WP(C)No.1561/2018, or in the order dated 03.03.2018 of the Registrar of Cooperative Societies. As an appropriate opportunity was given for raising any such claim or objection against an incorrect voters’ list and the appellant having not availed such opportunity, no further grievance can be entertained at the writ appellate stage. In fact, if the order of the learned Single Judge dated 03.08.2017 in WP(C) 4204/2017 and other writ petitions is taken into consideration, there is a categorical direction that after the correction of voters’ list to be effected pursuant to the general notice provided for in the said order, no further objection for correction of the voters’ list would be entertained before holding the elections.

¶35

Accordingly, the writ appeal is found to be devoid of any merit and the same is dismissed.

¶36

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶37

Comparing Assistant

MD Abdul Khalek v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Abdul Khalek v. the State of Assam and 5 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

Dipika Bora Vs the Assam Gramin Vikash Bank and 2 Ors.

Apurba Ballav Goswami Vs the Union of India and 9 Ors.

Prosenjit Dey Laskar Vs the Debt Recovery Tribunal (Drt) and 5 Ors.