MATHURALAL NAGDA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed against the order dtd. 28/6/2023 (Annexure-6) whereby the nomination forms of the petitioners for the election of Members of the Board of Directors (for short hereinafter referred to as, 'BOD') of Udaipur District Cooperative Land Development Bank Limited, Udaipur have been rejected holding them to be ineligible/invalid.

(2.) The facts of the case are that vide order dtd. 29/5/2023, the programme for election of the Delegate Body in the first step and for Members of the BOD in the second step was issued. The petitioners, who were elected for the delegate body, being eligible to contest for a Member of the BOD, submitted their nomination forms in the requisite format. However, the nomination forms of all the 15 members who filled up the forms, were rejected vide order impugned (Annexure-6) dtd. 28/6/2023 holding them to be invalid. The reason given for the said rejection was that none of the members was qualified in terms of Clause 26A(6) of the bye laws governing the bank.

(3.) Before adverting further in the matter, it is relevant to note that in the complete writ petition as well as reply to the writ petition, the impugned Clause has been mentioned to be Clause 26.6 whereas a perusal of the bye laws (Annexure-8) makes it clear that the same is Clause 26A(6). Both the counsels admitted that the same has been inadvertently mentioned and the same be read to be 'Clause 26A(6)'. In view of the admission and submission made by both the counsels, the Clause 26.6 as referred in the writ petition is read by this Court to be Clause 26A(6).