Mool Chand Netam v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR W.P. (S) No.

5 307 of 201 Mool Chand Netam, S/o Late Shri Deoo Ram Netam, aged about 64 years, R/o Village Devri, Post-Dhansera, Tahsil-Sarona, District - Kanker (C.G.) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Department of Cooperative Society, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Post Office & Police Station Rakhi, District Raipur (C.G.)

2. Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Chhattisgarh Block-3, Second and third floor, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

3. Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Raipur, Division Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

4. Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Tribunal, Bilaspur, through its President, District - Bilaspur (C.G.)

5. Sub Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Mahasamund, Tehsil & District- Mahasamund (C.G.)

6. Shri P. Tiwari, Senior Cooperative Inspector, Mahasamund, Tehsil and District- Mahasamund (C.G.)

7. Board of Directors, Gramin Seva Sahakari Samiti Maryadit, Pendravan, Reg. No. 1284, Sankara (Jonk), Tehsil - Pithhora, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) --- Respondents For Petitioner:

Shri Jitendra Gupta, Advocate.

For Respondent/State:

Shri Garry Mukhopadhyaya, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board / 11 /201 (1) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that order dated 10.03.2016 has been passed by respondent No.4,

Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Tribunal, Bilaspur without affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and, as such, he has not been heard and, therefore, he may be permitted to file review application before the respondent No. 4 and the same may be directed to be decided expeditiously.

(2) Prayer appears to be fair & reasonable.

(3) Be that as it may, if the petitioner prefers application for review of the order dated 10.03.2016 before the respondent No. 4 within a period of 10 days from today, the respondent No. 4 shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law on its own merit expeditiously. (4) With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands finally disposed of.

(5) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the authority concerned shall decide the review application on its own merit in accordance with law. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge D/-