Babubhai Arjanbhai Patidar and Others vs State of Gujarat and Others

D.H. Waghela, J.—In Special Civil Application Nos. 1439/2010, 2979/2010, 2980/2010, 3119/2010 and 3120/2010, learned Counsel Mr. SN Thakkar appears for the petitioners and, as submitted by him, the interim order dated 9.2.2010 of learned Member of the Board of Registrar''s Nominee, Rajkot in Amreli District Lavad Case Nos. 93 to 106 of 2009 is under challenge before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. In Special Civil Application No. 4566/2010, the interim order dated 3.4.2010 of Joint Registrar, Board of Nominee at Mehsana, similarly ordering fresh election of representative of the branches concerned, is under challenge.

While admitting the first petition i.e. Special Civil Application No. 1439 of 2010, this Court (Coram: Hon''ble Miss Justice RM Doshit and Hon''ble Mr. Justice KM Thaker) has, by order dated 24.2.2010, considered the contention that the Election Officer has declared the programme for the procedure contemplated under Rule 6 of the Gujarat Specified Cooperative Societies Election to Committee Rules, 1982 and granted interim relief staying the operation of the impugned order. Similar orders are made in other petitions thereafter. The petitioners herein are admittedly participating as voters in the process of election for Managing Committee of the Gujarat State Cooperative Agriculture and Rural Development Bank Limited (for short ''the Bank''), under the Gujarat Specified Cooperative Societies Election to Committee Rules, 1982; while the suits of the original plaintiffs calling into question election of the petitioners as Members of the Branch Committee and representatives and delegates of respective Branch of the Bank.

After the petitions being argued at some length by learned Counsel on both sides, there was limited consensus to the extent that since the process of election of the Managing Committee of the Bank was already under way and the voting for that purpose is to take place on 14th August, 2010, upholding the impugned orders or setting them aside would affect the election of which voters'' lists are finalized as early as in January, 2010 and election programme is declared in July, 2010. On the other hand, the Lavad suits of the original plaintiffs are pending and required to be expeditiously decided on merits and in accordance with law. Therefore, it was fairly conceded on behalf of the petitioners that if the suits were allowed or any relief were granted in the suits to the original plaintiffs, the petitioners herein will have to abide by the order of the Board of Registrar''s Nominee, subject to their right of appeal. It was clarified on behalf of the petitioners that the fact of their having participated in the current process of election for the committee of the Bank or even their own election shall not be pleaded as a defence or for any equitable relief, and they shall fully cooperate in the earliest practicable hearing and disposal of the Lavad cases of the original plaintiffs.

It is therefore, on the basis of the above limited consensus and by consent and without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties in the suits pending before the Board of Registrar''s Nominee, directed that the impugned orders shall not take effect and shall stand set aside. The petitioners herein shall cooperate in the earliest practicable hearing and disposal, on merits, of the Lavad suits of the respondent concerned pending before the Board of Registrar''s Nominee at Rajkot and Mehsana. The petitioners shall not take any unnecessary adjournment and the Board of Registrar''s Nominee concerned shall not grant any unnecessary or long adjournment to parties on either side, so as to hear and decide the pending Lavad cases as early as practicable and preferably by the end of September, 2010, but in no case later than 30th October, 2010.

The petitions are partly allowed in the aforesaid terms and Rule is made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs.