RAMESHWAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing of Annexueie-2, which is an order passed by the Sub-divisional Officer-cum-Super vising Officer (Sanchalan Padadhikari). It appears from the Bihar Co-operative Societies Rules that Sanchalan Padadhikari is the appointed under Rule 21-B of the Rules by the State Government, and is vested with the power to organise election in a Co-operative Society. In the case of Primary Society whose area of operation does not extend beyond the territorial boundary of one Sub-division, the Sub-divisional Officer may be appointed as Sancbalan Padadhikari. The said authority appoints Election Officer whose statutory duties have been enumerated in the Bihar Cooperative Societies Act. Similarly the polling officer is also vested with certain powers under the Rules.

(2.) The facts not in dispute are that respondent No. 4 is a primary Agriculture Credit Co-operative Society. The Sub-divisional Officer (respondent No. 2) was appointed Sanchalan Padadhikari, whereas the Anchal Adhikari (respondent No. 3) was appointed an Election Officer. The election of officer-bearers of the said Society was to be held since the term of the Managing Committee expired on 30th September, 1991. Accordingly, the Election Officer published the election schedule.

(3.) The grievance of the petitioner is that at the behest of one candidate whose nomination had been rejected on scrutiny, namely, Bhagwat Sah, the impugned order was passed by respondent No-2, the Election Supervising Officer (Sanchalan Padadhikari), Counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No. 2 has no jurisdiction under the Rules to issue such an order, and in any event even if he had such authority, he could only have postponed the date of poll and could not have asked for a for fresh schedule to be prepared.