Dismissed

Manorma Devi v. Registrar Co. Operative Societies

Jharkhand HC11 Jul 2019WPC/3112/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand dismissed a writ petition regarding an allotment dispute, holding that the availability of a remedy under Section 48(7) of the Jharkhand Cooperative Societies Act, 1935 precludes writ jurisdiction. The petitioner is directed to file a review petition before the authorized authority.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed; the petitioner is directed to file a review under Section 48(7) of the Act and the reviewing authority is directed to dispose of the review after hearing.

Manorma Devi Vs Registrar Co. Operative Societies — Writ and Judicial Review | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(C) No.3112 of 2018

¶3

¶4

Smt. Manorma Devi @ Manorma Choudhary……… Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

1. Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Jharkhand, Ranchi

¶7

2. Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro

¶8

3. Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies (H.Q.) Bihar, Patna

¶9

4. Udyami Awasiya Sahkari Lohanchal Complex Society Ltd. Bokaro Steel City, Bokaro

¶10

5. Sri Ram Nath Singh, Ex-Secretary, Udyami Awasiya Sahkari Lohanchal Complex Society Ltd., Bokaro Steel City, Bokaro

¶11

6. Uma Shankar Tiwary

¶12

7. Bokaro Industrial Area Development Authority, Balidih

¶13

………. Respondents

¶14

¶15

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD

¶16

--------- For the Petitioner For the Resp. Nos.1 to 3 For the Resp. No.6 For the Resp. No.7	: Mr. P.C. Tripathi, Sr. Advocate : Mr. Nipun Bakshi, Advocate : Mr. Prakash Chandra, Advocate : Mrs. Richa Sanchita, Advocate : Mrs. Haider Zoya, Advocate ---

¶17

06/11.07.2019 The order dated 22.04.2016 passed in Appeal Case No.02/2010 as also the order dated 16.11.2017 passed in Review Case No.16 of 2016, preferred by one Shri Vijay Kumar said to be the original allottee.

¶18

Mr. Nipun Bakshi, learned S.C. (Mines & Geology)-III appearing for the respondent nos.1 to 3 as also Mr. Prakash Chandra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.6, have raised preliminary objection regarding maintainability on the ground of availability of alternative remedy as provided under Section 48(7) of the Jharkhand Cooperative Societies Act, 1935.

¶19

They have further submitted that although the jurisdiction of review as conferred under Section 48(7) of the Jharkhand Cooperative Societies Act, 1935 has been invoked by Shri Vijay Kumar who is the original allottee and therefore, if the petitioner has got any grievance, she may also avail the jurisdiction of reviewing authority conferred under Section 48(7) of the Act, 1935.

¶20

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on appreciation of their rival submissions wherefrom, this Court has gathered that the petitioner is making out a case of non-consideration of the defence, however, the same has been disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents by submitting that the petitioner after service of notice has appeared but not chosen to contest her case but the appellate authority has passed the order but this Court is of the view that when the power of review has been created under the statute as provided under Section 48(7) of the Jharkhand Cooperative Societies Act, 1935, then the petitioner can well agitate the same before the reviewing authority which can be looked into by the reviewing authority, therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition on the ground of availability of remedy under the provision of Section 48(7) of the Act, 1935.

¶21

In view thereof, the writ petition is dismissed.

¶22

However, it is open for the petitioner to invoke the jurisdiction of the reviewing authority under the provision of Section 48(7) of the Jharkhand Cooperative Societies Act, 1935.

¶23

If the petitioner would approach by filing a review under the aforesaid provision, the reviewing authority is directed to dispose of the review in accordance with law after providing an opportunity of hearing to all the respective parties who are to be affected and going to be affected.

¶24

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

¶25

Rohit/-

Manorma Devi v. Registrar Co. Operative Societies

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manorma Devi v. Registrar Co. Operative Societies

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

Md Najmul Hasan And Anr. Vs Human Resources Department

Tara Devi Vs National Insurance Co. Ltd.

Subhagya Chandra Das Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Ranjit Kumar Parmanik Vs State of Jharkhand through Principal Secretary Personnel Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha Deptt

Madhu Devi Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Asir Khan And Anr. Vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors.