AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Challenge in this petition is to the impugned order dated 9/1/15 and consequential order dated 15/1/15 Annexure P/1 and P/2 passed by the petitioner society which is registered as a cooperative society under the M.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (for brevity "1960 Act").
Annexure P/1 the first impugned order is issued by the Assistant Commissioner Cooperative Societies Datia cancelling the proceedings conducted by the society in it's meeting dated 12/11/14 on the ground of having been conducted in violation of clause 27 (1) of the regulations governing the functioning of the petitioner society.
Pertinently in the said meeting dated 12/11/14, the services of Samiti Prabandhak Kanhaiyalal Surwariya and salesman Shailendra Sharma were terminated. The Assistant Commissioner Cooperative Societies while passing Annexure P/1 has directed the petitioner to conduct the meeting in accordance with procedure laid down in the regulations.
On the other hand, Annexure P/2 is a consequential order of the same authority directing the petitioner society to reinstate the said Samiti Prabandhak and Salesman and allowing them to function.
In a petition involving more or less similar factual scenario and legal issue i.e. W.P. 8119/14, this court has passed an order today relegating the petitioner society to avail alternative statutory remedy available u/S. 78 of 1960 Act.
The relevant concluding paragraph of the said decision rendered in W.P. No. 8119/14 is reproduced below for ready reference and convenience:-
"In view of above, this court declines interference and dismisses this petition with liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy available u/S. 78 of 1960 Act which if availed within a period of 30 working days, shall be entertained and decided without being dismissed on limitation alone.
The interim order passed staying Annexure P/1 shall remain in operation for a period of 30 working days or whenever remedy u/S. 78 of 1960 Act is availed whichever is earlier, whereafter the orders passed in appeal would prevail.
It is made clear that the appellate authority u/S. 78 of 1960 Act would be free to take decision on grant or refusal to grant interim relief (if asked for) independently without being influenced by this order.
With the aforesaid liberty, this petition stands disposed of. "
Accordingly, this petition is also disposed of in the same terms and the petitioner is given liberty to avail alternative statutory remedy available u/S. 78 of 1960 Act which if availed within 30 working days, shall be considered and decided without being dismissed on limitation alone.