Himachal Pradesh High Court
The Kurgan Land Loser Transport ... vs State Of Hp And Others on 9 August, 2016
Bench: Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Tarlok Singh Chauhan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA.
CWP No. 2063 of 2016.
Date of decision: 9th August, 2016.
The Kurgan Land Loser Transport Co-operative Society
.
.....Petitioner
Versus
State of HP and others ..... Respondents.
Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge.
of
Whether approved for reporting ?1
For the petitioner: rt Mr. Surinder Saklani, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Shrawan Dogra, Advocate General
with Mr. M.A. Khan, Additional
Advocate General, with Mr. J.K. Verma,
and Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate
Generals, for respondents No. 1 to 4.
Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice (Oral)
Petitioner, by the medium of this writ petition, has sought mainly the following reliefs.
"(i) That a writ in the nature of certiorari may very kindly be issued thereby quashing impugned order dated 1.8.2016 as contained in Annexure P4.
(ii) That the respondent No. 2 may very kindly be directed to implead the petitioner society as proper and necessary party and thereafter proceed in the matter by issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus."
2. It is moot question-whether the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, has power to hear intra Society 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:59:34 :::HCHP -2-matters. We leave this question open at this stage. It appears that the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, was seized of the matter, in terms of the order made by this .
Court in CWP No. 773 of 2010 titled Baghal Land Loosers Transport Coop. Society Ltd. versus State of HP and others & connected matter, decided on 11.5.2016, whereby he was commanded to hear the of parties. The petitioner was not born on the date when the judgment was made by this Court. The Registrar, rt Cooperative Societies, has rightly made the order, needs no interference.
3. In view of the above discussion, the petitioner has not even made out a case for issuance of notice. The petition, on the face of it, is abuse of process of law.
4. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed in limine alongwith pending applications. However, the petitioner is at liberty to seek appropriate remedy, if any available. Copy dasti.
(Mansoor Ahmad Mir) Chief Justice.
August 09, 2016. (Tarlok Singh Chauhan) (cm Thakur) Judge.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:59:34 :::HCHP