Gujarat High Court
Gulamrasul Abdulkarim Parbadiya - ... vs State Of Gujarat & 3 on 15 April, 2014
Author: C.L.Soni
Bench: C.L. Soni
C/SCA/17945/2013 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17945 of 2013
================================================================
GULAMRASUL ABDULKARIM PARBADIYA - CHAIRMAN OF....Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 3....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR.RAJESH B SONI, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR. NIRAJ ASHAR, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 - 2 , 4
MR DIPEN DESAI, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 3
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2 , 4
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.L. SONI
Date : 15/04/2014
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioner has prayed for following reliefs in para No.8 in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
"(A) Admit and allow the petition in the interest of justice.
(B) Your Lordship may be pleased to direct the respondent no.2 to decide the application of the petitioner dated 24.04.2013 sent by R.P.Ad. & take necessary action under sec.160(4) of Gujarat Co.Op.Society Act and remove the respondent no.3 from his post for non complying the written order of District Registrar as early as possible in the interest of justice.
(C) Your Lordship may be pleased to direct the respondent no.4 to decide the application Page 1 of 6 C/SCA/17945/2013 ORDER of the petitioner under Order 39 Rule 2A pending before Board of Nominees at Mehsana as early as possible.
(D) During pendency and final hearing of this petition, your Lordship may be pleased to restrain the respondent no.3 to accept the milk from the milk collection Center at Husenpura (V)."
2. Learned advocate Mr.R.B.Soni for the petitioner submitted that the District Registrar had issued direction by order dated 23.10.2012 asking the respondent No.3 to close down Milk Collection Center and to ensure that the milk is supplied to the society at the village. Mr.Soni submitted that such direction has not been complied with and therefore, for breach of the direction issued by the District Registrar, necessary action under Section 160(4) of the Cooperative Societies Act ('the Act' for short) is required to be initiated against the respondent No.3. Learned advocate Mr.Soni submitted that this very District Registrar, who had earlier issued notice under Section 76B of the Act against the office bearers of the society, has now by subsequent order, withdrawn the said notice when he found that the office bearers of the society were functioning according to the provisions of the Act. Mr.Soni Page 2 of 6 C/SCA/17945/2013 ORDER submitted that some members who are not cooperating with the society at village level and because of them, milk center is continued by the respondent No.3, which is against the very purpose of formation of the cooperative society at the village level. Mr.Soni submitted that since, there is a clear breach of the direction issued, this Court may direct the concerned authority to initiate necessary action under Section 160(4) of the Act against the respondent No.3. Learned advocate Mr.Soni also submitted that before the Board of Nominee, the petitioner has already made application for taking action for breach of injunction against the respondent No.3. However, such application is still remained pending and the respondent No.3, in defiance of the interim order, has continued with the milk center. He thus, urged to direct learned Board of Nominee to decide the application pending before it.
3. Learned advocate Shri Dipen Desai appearing for respondent No.3 submitted that after the District Registrar issued first direction dated 23.10.2012 for closing of milk collection center when he was apprised about the necessity to continue the milk collection Page 3 of 6 C/SCA/17945/2013 ORDER center, he passed another order dated 22.10.2013, whereby, he allowed the milk collection center to continue till the persons producing the milk are enrolled as members of the society and till peace prevails in the village as regards functioning of the cooperative society.
4. Mr.Desai submitted that the dispute in connection with the business of the society is already pending before the Board of Nominee. The petitioner has filed this petition just to pressurize the respondent No.3 and other members of the society to come to his terms. Mr.Desai submitted that provisions of Section 160(4) could be restored to, provided there is a breach of direction issued by the Registrar, however, in the present case, there is no breach of direction committed by respondent No.3 and therefore, there is no question of taking any action against the respondent No.3 under Section 160(4) of the Act. Mr.Desai thus, urged to dismiss the petition.
5. Learned AGP Mr.Niraj Ashar has adopted argument of Mr.Desai.
6. Having heard learned advocates for the parties, Page 4 of 6 C/SCA/17945/2013 ORDER it appears that on account of the circumstances prevailing concerning supply of milk, the District Registrar had issued order dated 23.10.2012 at Annexure:C, directing the respondent No.3 to close milk collection center and to see that the milk is supplied by the village people to the society functioning in the village. However, as per the later direction dated 22.10.2013 at Annexure:F issued by the District Registrar, the milk collection center was permitted to be continued till some settlement is arrived to restore the peace as regards the dispute in connection with supply of the milk to the society. In the said direction, the District Registrar has also observed that as regards the dispute in connection with the business of the society, the remedy is under Section 96 of the Act before the Board of Nominee.
7. In view of above such subsequent direction issued by the District Registrar, the earlier direction dated 23.10.2012 was not to operate against the respondent No.3. Since, the said direction did not remain in force, there was no question of complying the direction by the respondent No.3. In such fact situation, there is no question of directing the Page 5 of 6 C/SCA/17945/2013 ORDER respondent No.2 to take any action under Section 160(4) of the Act against the respondent No.3. As regards prayer made in para No.8(C) is concerned, this petition has mainly focused on taking of action under Section 160(4) of the Act. The petition is not arising out of any order made by the Board of Nominee. Though, the Board of Nominee could be directed to decide the application pending before it, however, in the facts of the case, the Court does not deem it proper to issue any direction prayed for in para No.8(C). It is for the petitioner to move appropriate application before the Board of Nominee for early disposal of any application pending before it.
8. For the reasons stated above, the petition is dismissed. Notice is discharged.
(C.L.SONI, J.) ANKIT Page 6 of 6