Dismissed¶37

Rakesh Kukretri v. State of Uttarakhand

Cooperative law – Uttarakhand Cooperative Societies Act, 2003

Uttarakhand HC8 Apr 2026WPMS/799/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Uttarakhand Cooperative Societies Act 2003; Sections 64, 66, 69, 72(2); winding up of cooperative society; inquiry by ADCO directed by Additional Registrar, Cooperative Society; opportunity of hearing before winding-up; audit inquiry vs winding-up inquiry; Registrar suo motu winding-up after prescribed notice; election programme notified during proceedings; High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital; Pankaj Purohit, J.; WPMS 789, 799, 800 of 2026; writ petitions dismissed as misconceived; decision dated 08.04.2026; citation 2026:UHC:2477.

What did the court decide?

Section 69 of the Act, 2003 contemplates an inquiry arising in an audit held under Section 64 of the Act, 2003; it does not apply where an inquiry is being conducted for the purpose of winding up of the society. ¶36

Rakesh Kukretri Vs State of Uttarakhand — Uttarakhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2026:UHC:2477

¶2

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶3

Writ Petition Misc. Single No. 789 of 2026

¶4

08 April, 2026

¶5

Virender Pokhriyal & another

¶6

--Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Uttarakhand & others

¶9

--Respondents

¶10

With

¶11

Writ Petition Misc. Single No.799 of 2026

Rakesh Kukretri

--Petitioner

Versus

State Of Uttarakhand & others

¶16

--Respondents

¶17

Writ Petition Misc. Single No.800 of 2026

¶18

Pushpa Tyagi

¶19

Versus State Of Uttarakhand & others

--Petitioner

--Respondents

Presence:-

Mr. Shobhit Sahaira, learned counsel for the petitioner(s). Mr. Yogesh Pandey, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State.

¶24

Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

¶25

These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners, who are members of a Primary Cooperative Society as well as members of the Central Cooperative Society, namely Doon Cooperative Stores Limited and Mahadev Avasiy Sahkari Samiti. The petitioners are aggrieved by the impugned order dated 17.03.2026, Annexure-11 to the petition, as well as the orders dated 01.01.2026 (annexure5 to the writ petition) and 05.01.2026 (annexure-6 to the writ

¶26

¶27

2026:UHC:2477

¶28

petition), whereby the Additional Registrar, Cooperative Society, directed the ADCOs to conduct an inquiry under Section 66 of the Uttarakhand Cooperative Societies Act, 2003 (for short, “the Act, 2003”) for taking action for winding up against the primary society as well as the central society, namely Doon Cooperative Stores Limited and Mahadev Avasiy Sahkari Samiti.

¶29

The action has been challenged by the petitioners on the premise that on 10.03.2026, the election programme for the cooperative societies in the State has been notified, therefore, the exercise undertaken by the respondents is bad and prejudicial to the interest of the petitioners' society.

¶30

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners' society will not get an opportunity of hearing under Section 69 of the Act, 2003 before the winding up proceedings, therefore, such an action cannot sustain in law.

¶31

This Court, vide order dated 01.04.2026, called for instructions from the learned State Counsel to submit before this Court as to whether apprehension of the petitioners that they would not get opportunity of hearing under Section 69 of the Act, 2003 is correct or not.

¶32

Instructions dated 04.04.2026 have been produced by the learned State Counsel, which are taken on record. In the instructions, it has been unequivocally stated that the provisions of Section 69 of the Act, 2003 are not attracted; rather, before proceeding further with the winding up of the petitioners' society under Section 72 of the Act, 2003, Sub-section (2) of Section 72 itself provides an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners' society. Therefore, the apprehension of the petitioners is misconceived.

¶33

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

¶34

¶35

2026:UHC:2477

¶36

having perused the provisions of Section 69 of the Act, 2003, this Court is of the opinion that the inquiry is contemplated in an audit held under Section 64 of the Act, 2003, and not in a case where inquiry is being conducted for the purpose of winding up of the society.

¶37

Sub-section (2) of Section 72 of the Act, 2003 speaks unequivocally that the Registrar may, of his own motion and after giving such notice as may be prescribed, pass an order of winding up of a cooperative society. In such view of the matter, no interference is warranted. All the writ petitions are misconceived and are accordingly dismissed.

¶38

Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly.

¶39

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 08.04.2026

¶40

¶41

Rakesh Kukretri v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Kukretri v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tajammul Khan Vs State of Uttarakhand

Vinay Kumar Vs State of Uttarakhand through the Secretary Home Affairs,Government of Uttarakhand

Madarsa Islamiya Migta Ul Uloom Vs State of Uttarakhand

Pushpa Tyagi Vs State of Uttarakhand

Prem Ballabh Bhatt Vs Indian Red Cross Society through Its General Secretary

Deveshwar Kala Vs State of Uttarakhand