Gujarat High Court High Court

Patel vs State on 11 November, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Patel vs State on 11 November, 2011
Author: V. M. Jhaveri,
  
 Gujarat High Court Case Information System 
    
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/16997/2011	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 16997 of 2011
 

 
======================================
 

PATEL
BHIKHABHAI HATHIBHAI - Petitioner
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 5 - Respondents
 

====================================== 
Appearance
: 
MR
VC VAGHELA for Petitioner. 
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, AGP for Respondent
No.1. 
None for Respondent Nos.2 -
6. 
======================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 11/11/2011 
ORAL ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI)

By
way of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated
02.11.2011 passed by the Election Officer – respondent No.3
herein and sought the direction to include the name of the petitioner
as a representative of the Manpura Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari
Mandali Limited – respondent No.5 society for the election of
respondent No.6 Society.

2. The
facts of the case are that the petitioner moved an application on
11.10.2011 stating that the respondent No.2 is not the member of
respondent No.5 Society and hence he cannot represent the respondent
No.5 Society as he has produced forged document and become Chairman
of the Society.

3. However,
while considering the case, the Election Officer has given reasons
that the question as to whether the member of the Mandali is entitled
to be enrolled as member or can represent the Society can be taken by
the District Registrar under Section 32 read with Section 28 (3) of
the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1965. We are in complete
agreement with the view taken by the Election Officer. It will be
open for the petitioner to move either the District Registrar or
Board of Nominees seeking appropriate relief.

4. With
the above observation, the petition stands dismissed in view of
availability of alternative remedy to the petitioner either before
the District Registrar of Board of Nominees. There shall be no order
as to costs.

Sd/-

[V. M. SAHAI, J.]

Sd/-

[K. S. JHAVERI, J.]

Savariya

   

Top