SURESH KUMAR TYAGI Vs. KRISHNA KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 216 of the Constitution of India must keep its hands off when there is equally efficacious remedy in a dispute pertaining to election, more so when there is statutorily prescribed remedy which almost reads in mandatory terms, is the short but significant question for determination in the present petition filed by the petitions Suresh Chand Tyagi, seeking relief for issuance of a writ of Certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 14-2-1994 (Annexure-7 to the petition), passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Mawana, District Meerut holding that the nomination papers of respondent Nos. 1 to 7 could not be rejected, rather they were held to be correct, and thereafter the election was held for ejecting members of the Managing Committee including the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Kisan Sewa Sahkari Samiti, Agwanpur, Meerut, a primary Agricultural Credit Society, (for short the Society), as defined under Section 2(A-1) of the U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965, (hereinafter referred to as the Act), which was registered under the Act.

(2.) As a result of the impugned order dated 14-2-1994 rendered by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Mawana, Meerut, the rejection of nomination papers of the candidates including the contesting respondents 1 to 7 was held to be illegal and their nomination papers were held to be valid and these respondents were allowed to participate in the election. In place of petitioner, Krishna Kumar, Respondent No.1 was elected and one Haridatt was also declared elected. Respondent No.1 Krishna Kumar was declared elected as Vice-Chairman of the Managing Committee of the Society. As a result of the election one Managing Committee of the Society has been constituted with Krishna Kumar, respondent No.1 as Vice-Chairman and one Haridutt as one of the members of the Managing Committee. Further, the prayer in the writ petition is that the members of the Managing Committee of the Society may be restrained by an ad-interim mandamus from functioning as such.

(3.) The portrayal of essential facts are these. To eject office-bearers and members of the Committee of Management of Kisan Sewa Sahkari Samiti, Agwanpur, Meerut, a primary agricultural credit society, an election was held in view of the provisions of Rule 411 of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Rules, 1968 (for short the Rules). For that purpose nomination papers in Form-K were obtained in accordance with the provisions pf Rule 42 of the Rules and they werre presented after completing all the formalities by the petitioner and also by the contesting respondents 1 to 7. It appears that the nomination papers of respondent Nos. 1 to 7 were rejected on technical grounds including that Iqbal, not a party to the writ petition, has got his name entered as Iqbal Khan, whereas he filled up his nomination form with the name Iqbal only. The nomination paper of Ram Bharose, respondent No.6 was rejected on the ground that in the name of his father the word 'Singh' was added. Similarly with regard to Tika. Ram, not a party to the writ petition, his nomination was rejected as his father's name was not entered. Similarly some other nomination papers were also rejected on other technical grounds. The contesting respondents and some other members made an application on 8-2-1994. The District Magistrate, Meerut on 10-2-1994, appointed the Sub-Divisional Officer, Mawana, as Arbitrator who has passed the impugned order correcting the clerical or other mistakes in the nomination papers and the nomination papers of the contesting respondents and some other candidates were held to be valid. Thereafter election, was held and respondent Nos.1 to 7 were declared elected. In view of the facts stated in the supplementary affidavit, the petitioner appears to have participated in the election and in his place respondent No.1 was elected, who later on was elected as Vice-Chairman of the Committee of Management of the Society. Against this impugned order holding the nomination paper of the contesting respondents 1 to 7 to be valid, the present petition has been filed with the aforesaid relief.