Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4 Thus, according to the respondent, it goes to show that if a Member or Nominee exercises discretion, primary Cooperative Society does not exercise any control thereon. It is, therefore, urged that the petitioner Society under the guise of present petitioner, cannot seek to represent against the so- called third party Member/ Nominee like Shri Gul Chaudhary, who is not before the Court and hence, the petition deserves no entertainment. 5 It is also the say of the respondent that even the proxy litigation for and on behalf of the third party must not be entertained for the purpose of protecting his so-called statutory right of nomination to contest the election as the Member of the Managing Committee of the Milk Union, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India programme on 12.12.2.2020. In view of this, it is contended that the only remedy available for such a proxy litigation is the election petition to be filed by the aggrieved party and affected person and not by the petitioner society. Such Election Petition needs to be before the Election Tribunal as per the provision of section 145U of the Act read with rule 82 of the Specified Committee Rules of 1982, more particularly, against the litigation in any of the nomination. The legal position, according to this respondent, is well settled by catena of decisions.

23 Per contra, learned Advocate General Mr.Kamal Trivedi appearing with learned Government Pleader, Ms. Manisha Lavkumar and Learned AGP Mr.Sharma for the State, has emphatically urged that classification of 'A', 'B' or 'C' would not bar the society for voting,however, his candidature would be barred if the class given to the society is 'C' or 'D'. According to him, every year the audit takes place and the classification is done following the guidelines. The automatic result of performance is to be given and there is alternative efficacious remedy under Section 155 of the Gujarat Co- operative Societies Act. According to learned Advocate General, the down grading of the society due to audit is an administrative act and therefore, there will be no requirement for hearing the parties and the remedy of the petitioner would lie under Section 155 of the Act. He has emphasized that this petition is not maintainable as the society can approach only if its right is in jeopardy, otherwise, a proxy litigation is impermissible. The society is litigating third party's right which is not permissible. Under Section 155 of the Act, the aggrieved party can always move to the Government and for not permitting the candidate of the petitioner to contest the election, since the election process is already set-in, no petition under Article 226 of the Constitution would lie and Election Petition shall need to be preferred before the Election Tribunal. He further has stated that there are highly disputed questions of facts which are needed to be addressed under Section 155 of the Act. In no manner, the Court, in a writ jurisdiction, can entertain those issues.

44.5 It is also unsustainable to argue that this is a proxy litigation for the purpose of protecting so-called statutory right of nominee of contesting election as a Member of Managing Committee of third party under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Election Commission is since not permitted to go into the question whether the classification given to the society was correctly given or not as also held by this Court in Special Civil Application No. 12731 of 2020, the society also cannot be relegated to the Election Tribunal, even if the process is said to have begun. In fact, as would be discussed above, no disqualification can be said to have suffered by the petitioner society.