MANJIT SINGH Vs. KABUL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE election of the Board of Directors (Managing Committee) of the Sangrur Central Co -operative Bank Ltd., Sangrur (hereinafter called the Bank), being due, the programme for the same was published November 30, 1977, according to which nomination papers could be filed upto December 19, 1977, and objections upto 10.30 a.m. on December 22, 1977. The scrutiny of the nomination papers was to take place between 2 P.M. to 3 P.M. on December 22, 1977, and the same could be withdrawn upto 4 P.M. on that very date. The poll, if necessary, was to take place on December 26, 1977, from 10 A.M to 4 P.M. Nine Directors were to be elected and for this purpose the whole area was divided into nine Zones, out of which seven were allotted to the Co -operative Agriculture Service Societies. The Societe represented by Manjit Singh petitioner and Harcharan Singh Brar, respondent No. 2, were in Zone No. 5 which contained 11 Co -operative Agriculture Service Societies, out of which the Sangrur Bank cleared only (sic) societies for voting purposes as the remaining societies were defaulter.

(2.) MANJIT Singh petitioner filed his nomination papers from Zone No.5. and so did Harcharan Singh Brar, respondent No. 2. On December 22, 1977, the petitioner was requested to withdraw his nomination papers to enable Harcharan Singh Brar, respondent No. 2, to be declared elected unopposed but he did not agree. The Assistant Registrar, Co -operative Societies, Sangrur, respondent No. 1, called the parties for hearing of the objections at about 4. P.M. on December 22, 1977, whereas the time for such scrutiny had expired at 3 P.M. The counsel for the petitioner as also Harcharan Singh Brar, respondent No. 2, were called upon to argue and after hearing the arguments, respondent No. 1 rejected the nomination papers of the petitioner at 5 -35 P.M. The petitioner could obtain a copy of the order of the Assistant Registrar, dated December 22, 1977, on the next day and he filed the present writ petition on December 24, 1977, alleging therein that the order passed was mala fide and wrong. It was also alleged that the order was without jurisdiction inasmuch as the scrutiny of the objections was started after the expiry of the period fixed for the purpose. He, therefore, prayed that the order of the Assistant Registrar, respondent No. 1, dated December 22, 1977, rejecting his nomination papers be quashed through a writ of certiorari and for a direction to respondent No. 1 to hold the election Zone No. 5 taking the nomination papers submitted by the petitioner as valid.

(3.) THE learned counsel for respondents have raised a preliminary objection that in view of the fact that alternative remedy is available to the petitioner, the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is not maintainable in view of the provision contained in clause (3) to Article 226. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that no alternative remedy was available to him on December 24, 1977, when the present writ petition was filed, inasmuch as the result of election pertaining to Zone No.5 had not been declared by the date. In support of his contention, he has placed reliance on a single Bench decision of this Court in Shri Amar Singh Dosanjh v. The State of Punjab and others, 1973 P.L.J. 289, and also of a Division Bench of this Court in Narinder Singh v. The State of Punjab and others, 1973 P.L.J. 720.