KANUBHAI RAMABHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India is sought to be invoked by the petitioners in this set of three petitions, pending the Appeals being No.4 of 2019, 5 of 2019 and 6 of 2019 filed them before the respondent No.2 i.e. Additional Registrar (Appeals) under Sec. 153 of the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act"). The prayers sought in these three petitions, which are identical in nature read as under:-

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the facts stated in Special Civil Application No.2526 of 2019 are taken into consideration.

(3.) At the outset, the learned Sr. Advocate Mr.Mihir Joshi for the respondent No.5 Society in all the three petitions has raised multiple preliminary objections as regards the maintainability of the petitions, on the ground that the petitioners have already availed of alternative remedy by filing appeals before the respondent No.2, which are pending for adjudication. He also submitted that the present petitions having been filed at the interlocutory stage, challenging the interlocutory orders would not be legally tenable. Assailing the very locus standi of the petitioners, he submitted that the petitioners in two petitions are the members of their respective Cooperative Societies, and the said Societies have already consented to grant registration to the respondent No.5 Society, and therefore, the petitioners in their individual capacity could not challenge the registration of respondent No.5 Society. According to him, the said facts having not been disclosed in the petitions, the petitions deserve to be dismissed on the ground of suppression of material facts. The petitioners have failed to show any legal injury suffered by them by the impugned order, and therefore, could not be said to be the aggrieved persons. On the conjoint reading of Sec. 4 and 9 of the said Act, it is only the concerned Society, which is likely to be adversely affected on the registration of the respondent No.5 Society could be said to be an aggrieved Society and not the individual member of such society. Mr.Joshi, relying upon the decision of this Court in case of Rameshbhai Maganbhai Lakhani Vs. State of Gujarat reported in, 2011 4 GLR 2877 dealing with the similar issues as involved in this set of petitions, urged that the petitions at the instance of the petitioners are not maintainable.