Ashok Kumar Verma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 1316 of 2017 • Ashok Kumar Verma S/o Late Mohan Lal Verma, Aged About 45 Years Resident Of Village And Post Adsena, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) And President, Primary Agriculture Credit Cooperative Society, Ganiyari (Registration No. 1829), Tehsil Tilda, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

2. Registrar, Co-Operative Societies, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Tehsil & District Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

3. Deputy Registrar, Co-Operative Societies, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 1st Floor, Vivekanand Complex, Vivekanand Nagar, Pension Bada, Tehsil & District Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

4. Primary Agriculture Credit Cooperative Society Ganiyari, ( Registration No. 1829 ), Block And Tehsil, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) Through Shri L. K. Sharma, Administrator/ Presiding Officer And Senior Assistant Inspector.

---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Manish Nigam, Advocate For respondent No.1 to 3 :

Shri Satish Gupta, Govt. Advocate on advance copy Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 10/05/2017

1. Heard.

2. While the petitioner sought by assailing the correctness of the order 29/09/2016 passed by the Co-operative Society on the submission that without there being any notice under Section 53 (1)(b) of the Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (for short, 'the Act'), supersession has taken place. Identical issue has been decided by this Court in WPC No. 2541 of 2016 Smt. Rukhmani Verma vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others vide order dated 03/03/2017, wherein

the proceedings for removal have been held illegal, only on this count, learned State counsel submits that in the present case also the same legal position would be applicable as the petitioner was not given notice under Section 53 (1)(b) of the Act. He concedes that the impugned order of supersession may be set-aside with liberty to take appropriate action in duly constituted proceeding under the provisions of Section 53 of the Act.

3. In view of the above contention made by the learned State counsel, the impugned orders are set-aside. However, the respondent-competent authority would be at liberty to reinitiate proceedings on allged irregularity, in accordance with law.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Kamde