VEDPAL SINGH Vs. GANNA SAH VIKAS SAMITI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) spondent No. 1 ganna sahkari vikas samiti ltd., daurala, district meerut (hereinafter referred to as the society) is a "primary society" as defined in Section 2 (q-1) of the u. P. Co-operative societies act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the act). According to clause 3 of it bye-laws, the area of operation of the society does not exnend beyond the revenue district of meerut. Clause 5 of the bye-laws of the society provides that its membership shall be open to

(2.) the petitioners are individual members of the society. According to clause 34 of the bye-laws the general body of the society is constituted by,

(3.) it is a society in respect of which a notification un-disputably has been issued by the state government as ccntemplated by the proviso to sec. 29(3) of the act, vesting the superintendence direction, control and conduct of election of its members,chairman and vice-chairman of the committee of management in the registrar. The deputy cane commissioner, western region, meerut, who is also the registrar, cane co-operative societies, exercising the powers of the registrar, passed an order dated 9th August, 1978, under, sec. 29 of the act read with Rule 439(2) of the Rules framed thereunder fixing 28th SEPTEMBER, 1978 for holding elections and directed the district magistrate, meerut, to appoint an election officer. The sub-divisional magistrate, sardhara was appointed by the district magistrate as the election officer for holding of the committee of managements. After the regisrar had finally determined and published the constituencies under Rule 440 (8) in the "dainik hamara yug", dated 1st SEPTEMBER, 1978, a local newspaper published from meerut, the petitioners field nomination papers for selection as members of the committee of management of the society from daurela. Sambholi sardhana, kaithvari; lavar and pusar constituencies. Their nomination papers were accepted as valid by the election officer after scruting and they became candidates for election as members of the managing committee of the society. It is alleged that respondent No. 2 did not file any nomination paper as a candidate for election as member of the committee of the society. On the 16th OCTOBER, 1968, which wasa postponed date, the petitioners were declared as duly elected members of the committee of management.