Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Ag (Sri Netai Chandra Datta & Anr vs State Of West Bengal & Ors.) on 30 October, 2017
Author: Debangsu Basak
Bench: Debangsu Basak
1
W. P. 25517 (W) OF 2017
30.10.2017
ag (Sri Netai Chandra Datta & Anr. -vs- State of West Bengal & Ors.)
Sl. No.9 & 10 WITH
Court no.13 W. P. 22246 (W) OF 2017
WITH
C. A. N. 9884 OF 2017
(Sri Goutam Kumar Chattopadhyay & Ors. -vs- State of West Bengal & Ors.)
WITH
W. P. 23650 (W) OF 2017
WITH
C. A. N. 9883 OF 2017
(Sri Dipak Chakrabarti & Ors. -vs- State of West Bengal & Ors.)
Mr. Satarup Banerjee
Mr. Sayak Ranjan Ganguly
Mr. Avirup Mitra - for the Petitioners
Mr. Achyut Basu
Mr. Bharat Chandra Simai
Mr. Rupchand Chakraborty
Ms. Sonam Basu
Ms. Punam Basu - for the Respondent/Applicant
Mr. Pradip Kumar Roy Ms. Shraboni Sarkar - for the State Three writ petitions along with two applications made therein are taken up for analogous hearing as they relate to the election of a society.
W. P. 22246 (W) of 2017 is referred to as 'the first writ petition' as it is first in point of time, while W. P. 25517 (W) of 2017 is referred to as 'the second writ petition' as it is filed second in point of time and W. P. 23650 (W) of 2017 is referred to as 'the third writ petition' as it is filed third in point of time.
The learned advocate for the first writ petitioner draws the attention of the Court to the order dated September 8, 2017 passed in W. P. 22246 (W) of 2017 and submits that, such order was passed on the basis of a factually wrong statement known to be wrong made by the respondents in such writ petition. He submits that, the District 2 Level Committees were not duly constituted for the purpose of holding the election of the parent body. Consequently, he submits that, necessary relief be granted to the first writ petitioner. He also points out to the averments made in the application being C. A. N. 9883 of 2017 where the applicants therein acknowledge that there were incorrect statements made on their behalf as recorded in such order dated September 8, 2017.
The learned advocate appearing in support of C. A. N. 9883 of 2017 submits that, the order dated September 8, 2017 should be modified.
It is sad to note that, the Court was misdirected by a person who is an advocate of the Court and claims himself to be the President of the society. On his statements, the order dated September 8, 2017 was passed. His conduct borders on professional misconduct. His statement was recorded as follows:-
"The respondents are represented. It is submitted on behalf of the respondents including the President of the League that, the election to the district committees were concluded by the first weeks of February 2017. Consequently, there is no impediment in the conduct of the election to the State committee as sought to be done by the notice dated July 26, 2017. So far as the appointment of observers are concerned, the respondents leaves it to the discretion of the Court."
It is open to the parties to take steps in accordance with law with regard to such conduct of such person.
The order dated September 8, 2017 permitted the election of the parent body to be held under the observations of three personnel of the three fields of the defence.
Apparently, the election was held.
In view of the order dated September 8, 2017 being passed on a wrong factual basis, the same is required to be recalled. All benefits taken by the parties to the litigations pursuant to the order dated September 8, 2017 are also recalled. 3 Consequently, the election held pursuant to the order dated September 8, 2017 is declared as null and void.
In view of such declaration, there is a likelihood of the composition of the parent body dying a natural death.
In such circumstances, in order to avoid further controversies and in order to facilitate the smooth conduct of the election of the society, it would be appropriate to supersede the parent committee forthwith. Three personnel requested to observe the proceedings of the election of the parent body by the order dated September 8, 2017, are appointed as administrators of the parent body. They will take steps in accordance with rules and regulations of the society to conduct the elections of the district level committees and the parent body. Let such process for the elections commence within seven days from date.
Let affidavits-in-opposition be filed both in the applications as well as in the writ petitions within a fortnight from date. Affidavits-in-reply thereto, if any, be filed within one week thereafter.
The parties are at liberty to mention the matter for early hearing on completion of affidavits.
Urgent certified website copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance of the requisite formalities.
(Debangsu Basak, J.)