Balwinder Singh and Others vs Secretary, Cooperation Department Punjab and Others

Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J.—The Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Patiala had accepted the petition/reference u/s 55/56 of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act, 1961 and held that the election of managing committee of The Daun Kalan Cooperative Agricultural Service Society Ltd., Daun Kalan, Tehsil and District Patiala (hereinafter referred to as, ''the Society'') was not held in consonance with the procedure prescribed.

It is not disputed that for election to the members of managing committee of the Society, 26 nomination papers were filed and 9 members were to be elected. The Returning Officer rejected all the nomination papers except of those 9 persons, who were declared unanimously elected as members of managing committee of the Society. It was alleged that the Returning Officer had neither invited any objections to the nomination papers nor any enquiry was held. No scrutiny of the nomination papers was conducted and no opportunity was given to withdraw the nomination papers. Furthermore, the list of those nine candidates, whose nomination papers were found in order, was not displayed. It was further alleged that the Returning Officer acted in haste to the advantage of nine elected persons. The very procedure adopted shows that the election was a farce. When 26 members came forward to contest the election, only 9 forms were found in order. The Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Patiala, while deciding the reference, on 10th December, 2009 has held as under:

After perusing the presented record and after hearing the arguments of both the counsels, I came to the conclusion that the investigation of the nomination papers filed for the election of the Managing Committee is not perused properly because the Secretary of the Society and Returning Officer himself admitted that at the time of verification of the nomination papers, the returning officer did not take any statement from the Secretary of the Society nor perused the record. So I set aside the election proceedings after filing of nomination paper and direction be issued to Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Patiala that an election officer be appointed in the Society and the proceedings be conducted after the filing of the nomination papers and date be fixed and after issuing election programme the election be conducted.

Even in appeal, the counsel for the appellant only stated that an Election Manager be appointed and the proceedings be initiated after filing fresh nomination papers. Appellate authority observed as under:

At the time of filing of the appeal the ld. Counsel stated that the election of the petitioner has been set aside by the Court below. He stated that Election Manager be appointed and the proceedings be initiated after filing of new nomination papers. After seeing the order of the Court below it is presumed that returning officer did not peruse the nomination papers of the candidates properly. From which it is presumed that the election proceedings of the Society are not initiated in proper manner.

That being so, while exercising writ jurisdiction, will be hesitant to interfere in the well reasoned orders passed by the authorities. Hence, the present petition is hereby dismissed. No costs.