Dismissed

Surendra Singh and Others v. State of Uttarakhand and Others

Uttarakhand HC14 Mar 2013WPMS/506/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed a writ petition challenging the Election Officer's order refusing to entertain objections regarding the induction of a new member in a Cooperative Society. Relying on a Division Bench decision, the court held that the Administrator possesses the power to enroll new members.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; no order as to costs.

Surendra Singh and Others Vs State of Uttarakhand… — Cooperative Societies | Uttarakhand HC (2013)

¶1

WPMS No. 506 of 2013 Hon’ble Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J.

¶2

Mr. Siddhartha Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶3

Mr. Paresh Tripathi, Addl. C.S.C. for the State.

¶4

In this writ petition, the petitioners challenged the order passed by the Election Officer refusing to entertain objection raised by the petitioners with regard to induction of a new member. It is the case of the petitioners that Administrator has no power to enroll new member in a Cooperative Societies as it is not an elected body. Learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon, in this connection, a Single Bench judgment of this Court which supports the contention of the petitioners.

¶5

It appears that the impugned order has been passed with the reasons that the judgment referred to by the learned counsel for the petitioner and placed before me is a judgment in personem and is not in rem. I cannot subscribe the view taken by the Election Officer for the decision rendered by the High Court relying on the decision

¶6

of the Supreme Court on a particular legal issue is binding on the parties raising identical issue, as it is precedent. However, I cannot grant any relief in any manner to the petitioner in view of the decision of Division Bench judgment rendered in case of Paniyala Shram Sambida Sahakari Samiti Ltd. Vs. Committee of Management, Sahkari Ganna Vikas Samiti Ltd. and another, reported in 2008 (2) U.D., 207. In paragraph 13 of the said judgment, the Court clearly decided as follows:-

¶7

“…….. We hold that the Administrator or the Committee appointed by the Registrar can enroll new members for the election and the Administrator has the power to re-determine the number of constituencies in which the area of operation of the society shall be divided; the extent of area of each constituency; the total number of seats allotted to each constituency; and the number of seats reserved for weaker sections.”

¶8

Therefore, the writ petition is

¶9

dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.

¶10

(K.J. Sengupta, J.)

¶11

Shiv

¶12

Dated 14.03.2013

Surendra Singh and Others v. State of Uttarakhand and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surendra Singh and Others v. State of Uttarakhand and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Danish Akhtar Vs State of Uttarakhand and Others

Surender Singh Vs Mohd. Yusuf

Smt Krishna Devi Vs State of Uttarakhand and Others

Smt Muneshwari Devi Vs State of Uttarakhand and Others

M/S M.D.Autoparts Pvt.Ltd. Vs Sub Divisional Magistrate Kashipur and Others

Smt Anjana Goyal and Another Vs State of Uttarakhand and Others