Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

IKRAR AHMAD AND ANOTHER versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' SECRETARY, CO

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Ikrar Ahmad And Another v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secretary, Co-Op. U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. 23181 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 8696 (1 May 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Writ Petition No. 23181 of 2006

HON'BLE YATINDRA SINGH, J

HON'BLE SHISHIR KUMAR, J.

1. Rampur Kisan Sewa Sahkari Samiti Ltd (the Society) is a cooperative society under the UP Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 (the Act). The petitioners are President and Vice President of the Society. On 6.3.2006 six members of the committee of management gave an application to the District Magistrate to bring no confidence motion against them. The District Magistrate passed an order dated 13.3.2006 fixing the meeting for consideration on 4.4.2006. Thereafter a notice of the same date was also circulated. A notice was also published in the newspaper Dainik Jagaran on 2.4.2006 regarding holding of no confidence motion on 4.4.2006. The meeting was held on 4.4.2006 in which no confidence motion was carried. The petitioner challenged this meeting by means of writ petition no. 21164 of 2006. This writ petition was withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh writ petition. Now the present fresh writ petition has been filed.

2. We have heard counsel for the petitioner; standing counsel and Ms. Manju Chauhan for the respondents. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the notice for no confidence was given on 6.3.2006 which was signed by the six members. As there were 12 members, the notice not being signed by more than half members is illegal. The two nominated members were removed on 3.2.2006 and 25.2.2006. There were only 10 members on 6.3.2006. The notice signed by six members is valid. Apart from it, the meeting has been held in which the petitioner has also participated. The resolution has been passed. In view of this, we see no justification to interfere with the writ petition. The writ petition is dismissed.

Date: 1.5.2006

SKS


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.