Orissa High Court
) Biranchi Narayan Dehury vs ) State Of Odisha on 17 February, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.4632 of 2025
1) Biranchi Narayan Dehury ..... Petitioners
2) Markanda Dehury Represented By Adv. -
3) Purna Chandra Dehury Mr. Aurobinda Sahoo
-versus-
1) State Of Odisha, represented by ..... Opposite Parties
its Secretary, Department of Co-
Operation, Lok Seva Bhavan,
Bhubaneswar.
2) Assistant Registrar of Co- Represented By Adv. -
operative Societies (ARCS) , Mr. Pitambar Acharya,
Keonjhar Circle, Keonjhar. Advocate General
3) Registrar, State Co-operative
Election Commission, Odisha,
Bhubaneswar.
4) Chairman-cum-Administrator,
Gandhamardan Loading Agency &
Transporting Co-operative Society
Ltd., Keonjhar.
5) Secretary, Gandhamardan
Loading Agency & Transporting
Co-operative Society Ltd.,
Keonjhar.
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
ORDER
17.02.2025 Order No.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).
2. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioners as well Page 1 of 6. as Mr. Pitambar Acharya, learned Advocate General appearing for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ petition as well the documents annexed thereto.
3. Present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioners with a prayer to quash the impugned constituency wise electoral roll dated 31.01.2025 under Annexure-10 and the election schedule Notification dated 18.01.2025 under Annexure-9 to the writ petition. The Petitioners have further prayed for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the Opposite Parties to prepare a fresh electoral roll of Gandhamardhan Loading Agency & Transporting Co-Operative Society Ltd. after taking into consideration the grievance/objection raised by the Petitioners to the above noted electoral roll of the Society.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioners, at the outset, submitted that in blatant violation of the rules and regulations of the OCS (Elections to the Committees) Rules, 1992, final electoral roll of the above noted Co-operative Society was prepared and entire election process was conducted hastily. He further submitted that since the final electoral roll has not been prepared as per the Bye-Laws of the Society and the relevant rules for conducting the election, the final electoral roll so prepared and published is absolutely illegal and on the basis of such electoral roll, the election should not have been held to select the members of the committee as well as office bearers of the above noted Cooperative Society. He further Page 2 of 6. contended that the conduct of the Opposite Parties is in violation of Section 16 of the Odisha Co-Operative Societies Act, 1962 as well as Clause-5(a) of the Bye-Laws of the concerned Society. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioners contended that the impugned conduct of the Opposite Parties calls for interference by this Court to maintain the sanctity of the election process of the above noted Cooperative Society.
5. Mr. Pitambar Acharya, learned Advocate General appearing for the State-Opposite Parties, on the other hand, contended that the election of the members as well as office bearers of Cooperative Society was notified on 05.12.2024 under Annexure-7 by the State Co-Operative Election Commission, Odisha indicating therein that the Committee of Management of the Society has been dissolved with effect from 23.07.2024 and that an administrator has been appointed and on the request of such administrator, the election has been notified to elect the new members to the committee of management of the above noted Co-operative Society in terms of the O.C.S. Act, 1962 and OCS (Elections to the Committees) Rules, 1992.
6. Mr. Acharya, further contended that in the meanwhile, Sri Prabhakar Naik, Sr. ARCS, Keonjhar, Circle, Keonjhar, has been appointed as the Election Officer to conduct the election of the above noted Co-Operative Society. Pursuant to the aforesaid Notification dated 05.12.2024, the election process has commenced. Mr. Page 3 of 6. Acharya, learned Advocate General further contended that in the event the Petitioners are aggrieved by the result of the election, then remedy in the shape of Section 67-B is provided in the O.C.S. Act, 1962. Accordingly, the Petitioners are required to file an election petition before the Tribunal in the event they are aggrieved in any manner by process following which the election of the above noted Cooperative Society is being conducted now.
7. In reply to the submissions made by learned Advocate General appearing for the State-Opposite Parties, learned counsel for the Petitioners, referring to the Notification dated 05.12.2024 under Annexure-7 to the writ petition, submitted that the date fixed for the election under the aforesaid notification is 23.02.2025. Therefore, the election has not taken place in the meantime.
8. Mr. Pitambar Acharya, learned Advocate General appearing for the State-Opposite Parties, on the other hand, contended that there is a specific bar with regard to interference by this Court under Section 28-B of the O.C.S. Act, 1962.
9. On perusal of the Section 28-B of the O.C.S., Act, 1962, it appears that the same was originally not there in the statute and subsequently brought into the statute book by virtue of an amendment vide Orissa Act No.28 of 1991 w.e.f. 11.9.1992. The said Section 28-B reads as follows:-
"28-B. Election process not to be held up - Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act and Rules, election process of a Society, once Page 4 of 6. started, shall not be held up, and no matter relating to election of the President or members of the Committee shall be called in question before any authority under this Act until the declaration of the result of such election."
10. On a plain reading of Section 28-B of the O.C.S. Act, 1962, it appears that once the election process of a Society has started, notwithstanding anything contained in any Act or Rules, the same shall not be held up. Further, the said provision provides that the mater relating to election of the President or members of the Committee shall not be called in question before any authority under this Act until the declaration of the result of such election. As it appears from the record, the election process has started vide Notification dated 05.12.2024 under Annexure-7 to the writ petition, therefore, it would not be legal and proper to interfere with the election process while the same is continuing. Moreover, a specific remedy is provided to the aggrieved party to raise all election related disputes including result thereof under Section 67-B of the O.C.S. Act, 1962 by presenting a properly constituted petition before the Tribunal. On analysis of Section 67-B of the O.C.S. Act, 1962, it is observed that such a provision has been made to raise election dispute with regard to election of any office bearers of a Society before the Tribunal. Thus, the statute provides an alternative mechanism for adjudicating of election disputes.
11. In the aforesaid factual as well as legal backdrop, this Court is of the view that the present writ petition is not Page 5 of 6. maintainable. Accordingly, the writ petition is being disposed of by granting liberty to the Petitioners to approach the Co-Operative Tribunal under Section 67-B of the O.C.S. Act, 1962 by filing a properly constituted election petition after declaration of the final result of such election. In the event the Petitioners approach the Tribunal, the Tribunal shall adjudicate the case of the Petitioners on its own merit without being influenced by any of the observation made hereinabove.
12. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.
( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Debasis Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 19-Feb-2025 17:50:14 Page 6 of 6.