AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Hon’ble Mr. Subhash Upadhyay, J.
The petitioner has filed the writ petition with the following reliefs:
“(i)Issue a Writ, order, or direction in the nature of Certiorari calling for the original records and quashing the impugned order dated 02.09.2026 passed by Respondent No. 3 (Election Officer / SDM, A Pithoragarh) in Objection No. 10 (Manoj Kumar Singh Samant v. Smt. Suman Khanka & Ors.) [Contained in this writ petition as Annexure No.1 from page 16 to page 18 to the extent it disqualifies the Petitioner (Pradeep Thapa) from the electoral roll of District Cooperative Bank Ltd., Pithoragarh;
(ii)Issue a Writ, order, or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding Respondents No. 2, 3, and 4 to restore and include the Petitioner's name in the final electoral roll, and allow him to exercise all statutory delegate rights, including the right to contest, propose, second, and vote in the election of the Committee of Management (Directors) of District Cooperative Bank Ltd., Pithoragarh;
iii) Issue a Writ, order, or direction in the nature of Declaration declaring that the electoral roll finalized for the election of the Committee of Management of District Cooperative Bank Ltd. Pithoragarh, excluding the Petitioner, is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Section 20 of the Act, 2003 and Rule 12(ख) of the 2018 Rules.
iv) Issue a Writ, order, or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the entire consequential election process, including the scrutiny of nominations, symbol allotment, and polling for the Committee of Management of District Cooperative Bank Ltd. Pithoragarh, insofar as it proceeds without the lawful participation of the Petitioner.
v)Issue a Writ, order, or direction in the nature of Quo-Warranto or Mandamus declaring that any election conducted to the Committee of Management on the basis of the truncated electoral roll shall be non-est, void ab initio, and liable to be set aside
vi) To issue any other suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
vii) To award the cost of the writ petition in favour of the petitioner.”
Instructions were sought in the matter from the respondents. In response thereto, instruction has been submitted by the Additional Registrar, Uttarakhand Cooperative Societies, in which, it has been stated that the petitioner has challenged the decision of the Election Officer, whereby the petitioner has been disqualified from participating in the election process. He submits that the grievance of the petitioner relates to process of the participation and finalization of the electoral roll and is required to be dealt with in accordance with the scheme governing the election to Cooperative Societies and the petitioner has remedy in law as provided under Rule 50 of the Uttarakhand State Cooperative Societies Election Rules 2018. Rule 50 of the Rules, 2018 reads as follows:
“50.(1) The parties aggrieved by the election of any official or representative of any Co-operative society can file an election suit under Section 70, which shall be referred to,-
a)To the concerned District Magistrate in the case of Primary and Central/District level Cooperative Societies, who shall himself decide the dispute or may appoint any of the Sub Divisional Magistrate under him as Arbitrator or the Chairman of the Arbitration Board as the case may be, in the case of Primary Co-operative Society and in the case of Central/District level Co-operative Societies decide the dispute himself or appoint any of the Additional District Magistrate under him as Arbitrator or as the Chairman of the Board as the case may be.
b)The Authority in the case of any State level/apex Co-operative Society which may decide the dispute himself or may appoint any Election Commission as Arbitrator or as the Chairman of Arbitration Board.
(2)In regards to election of any co-operative society no objection shall be raised by arbitration or otherwise except on the ground that-
a)the election has not been fair by reason that corrupt practice, bribery or undue influence prevailed at the election, or
b)the result of election has been materially affected,-
1.By improper acceptance or rejection of any nomination. or
2.By improper acceptance or refusal or rejection of votes or
3.By gross failure to comply with the provision of the Act, the rules or the bye-laws of the Co-operative Society.
Explanation – For the purpose of this rule, corruption, bribery or undue influence shall have the same meaning as assigned to them under section 123 of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951.
(4)A dispute relating to election shall be referred by the aggrieved party within 45 days of the declaration of the result.
5)Notwithstanding anything in these rules, the applicant filing the election suit shall deposit the fees as follows in the head of account fixed by the State Government and shall enclose the original receipt with the plaint:-
a)In case of primary cooperative societies- ₹ one thousand.
b)in case of District/Central cooperative societies - ₹ two thousand.
c)in case of State Level /Apex Cooperative Societies - ₹ five thousand.
Provided that, the suit shall not be accepted if the receipt of fees is not submitted.”
As the election process has already been notified, in such view of the matter, the Court cannot interfere in the said election process. Moreover, as per Rule 50 of the Uttarakhand State Cooperative Societies Election Rules, 2018 the petitioner if aggrieved by the election process, can file an election suit under Section 70. The writ petition against the election process already been notified is not maintainable and is dismissed as the petitioner has an efficacious statutory remedy available under the Uttarakhand State Cooperative Societies Election Rules, 2018.