1. Heard Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri H.N. Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 8, Sri Nripendra Mishra, learned counsel for respondent No. 3 and the learned Standing Counsel. The challenge in the present petition is order dated 11.12.2012, notification dated 6.2.2013, order dated 18.2.2013 and notification dated 19.2.2013 passed by the respondent No. 3. Further prayer is for a mandamus commanding respondents to hold election as per the electoral college containing 240 valid members of which last election dated 20.6.2010 was held.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners are members of Co-operative Society, namely, Kamal Kunj Sahkari Awas Samiti Limited, Agra (hereinafter referred to as the ''Samiti''). The last election of the committee of members of the society was held on 20.6.2010. There was some complaint with regard to working of the society and an enquiry was initiated by order dated 15.9.2012 passed by the respondent No. 3 superseding the society. The receiver was appointed.
3. Challenging the order dated 15.9.2012 a writ petition No. 54156 of 2012 was filed. The writ petition was disposed of by the judgment and order dated 18.10.2012 and the matter was relegated to the authority concerned to consider and decide the same afresh after giving full opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass a reasoned order. In the meantime, the U.P. Ordinance No. 8 of 2012 was promulgated and notification dated 19.10.2012 was issued making amendment in Section 29(2) of the U.P. Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter called as the ''Act'') and period of cooperative society was reduced from three years to two years. As a result of which the term of committee of management of the society came to an end. The order dated 11.12.2012 was passed by the respondent No. 3 in compliance of directions given by this Court dated 18.10.2012. The respondent No. 3 appointed an Administrator in exercise of power u/s 29(5)(b) of the Act and further directed that the Administrator shall take steps for election of the committee of management of the society at the earliest. The respondent No. 3 further concluded in the order dated 11.12.2012 that as the term of the committee of management had expired on 19.10.2012 on completion of period of two years, therefore, the proceedings initiated against the then committee of management be dropped.
4. Further a notification dated 6.2.2013 was issued notifying the determination of constituencies and inviting objections, thereon. The petitioners submitted objection on 9.2.2013. The same was considered and decided by the order dated 18.2.2013 passed by the respondent No. 3 which is under challenge in the present petition. After disposal of the objection received, a notification dated 19.2.2013 was issued notifying final determination of constituencies and date of election.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners assailing the order dated 11.12.2012 submits that in view of the fact that this Court vide order dated 18.10.2012 had disposed of writ petition with a direction to decide the matter afresh, it was incumbent upon the respondent No. 3 to decide the objections raised by the petitioners. However, instead of deciding the objections, the respondent No. 3 appointed an Administrator on the ground that the term of committee of management had expired. The order dated 11.12.2012 passed by the respondent No. 3 is illegal and contrary to the directions given by this Court.
6. Second submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that against the notification dated 6.2.2013 they submitted their objections and categorically stated that list of members has been shockingly reduced from 240 to 91 and cannot be substantiated from the record. List of 91 members is a forged list. Instead of deciding the objections of the petitioners, the respondent No. 3 rejected the same on the ground that objections do not relate to determination of the constituencies rather it was with regard to appointment of Secretary and a list of members of society. The approach of respondent No. 3 is arbitrary and the order dated 18,2.2013 suffers from illegality and deserves to be set aside.
7. He further submits that notification dated 19.2.2013 regarding final determination of constituencies issued by respondent No. 3 is illegal in view of the fact that electoral college of 240 members which had attained finality and on the basis of which last election was held, illegally reduced to 91 members. The exclusion of members of the society is illegal and therefore, the entire proceedings undertaken by the respondent No. 3 is bad.
8. He further submits that Election Officer has not notified election programme including the dates for display of provisional voter list, objections and display of final voter list.
Refuting the submission of the petitioners, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the election programme has been notified by the Election Officer on 22.2.2013 much prior to filing of the writ petition. On the date of filing of the present petition i.e. on 4.3.2013, even the objections were disposed of and symbols have been allotted. In view of admitted position that the election process has been commenced, we find no reason to interfere with the election at this stage. In
In view of the same, the writ petition is dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy of filing election petition, after the elections are concluded.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
