HARIMOHAN PADHI Vs. RANGANATH DAS AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER was a member of the Chatrapur Co -operative Land Development Bank Limited (hereafter called the 'Bank') and was elected to the Managing Committee of the Bank on 2 -3 -1969. He resigned therefrom on 19 -8 -1971. In November, 1971, the Managing Committee was superseded before completion of the term in exercise of the powers under Section 32 of the Orissa Co -operative Societies Act of 1962 (hereafter called the 'Act') and an Administrator was appointed. The administration of the Bank vested in the Administrator until 25 -4 -1973. Petitioner was elected to the Managing Committee as an elector from the non -borrowing constituency and assumed office as a Director of the Bank with effect from 26.4.1973. He also came to be elected as the President of the Bank. Fresh election was scheduled to be held in December, 1976. Nomination were called for by the Election Officer of the Bank and the objections to the nominations were fixed to be heard on 26.12.1976. Petitioner submitted his nomination paper from the non -borrowing constituency. Objection was raised against Petitioner's nomination paper on the ground that he had completed two consecutive terms as member of the Managing Committee and had, therefore, become ineligible for be selected again in terms of Section 28(4)(a) of the Act. The objection was upheld and Petitioner's nomination paper was rejected. On appeal, the Deputy Registrar of Co -operative Societies, Berhampur, (opposite party No. 2) reversed the decision and found that Petitioner had not completed two consecutive terms and, therefore, had not become ineligible for contesting the election of 1976. Opposite party No. 7 carried a revision to the Additional Registrar of Co -operative Societies (opposite patty No. 3) and the Revisional Authority reversed the appellate order and restored the original order of rejection of the nomination paper. Petitioner carried a further revision to the Registrar of Co -operative Societies (opposite party no 4) and having lost before him, came before the State Government and these authorities also upheld the decision of the Additional Registrar. This writ application assails the rejection of the nomination paper of the Petitioner.

(2.) SECTION 28(4)(a) of the Act provides:

(3.) THE writ application is bound to succeed. We would accordingly quash the various orders of the statutory authorities rejecting the nomination paper of the Petitioner and hold that Petitioner was not disqualified and his nomination paper was not liable to be rejected.