Registrar Co-Operative Society Exercising Power Of Election Tribunal Cannot Issue Interim Direction Of Any Nature: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The division bench of Chief Justice Ravi Malimath and Justice Dinesh Kumar Paliwal was dealing with a writ appeal preferred by the Appellant against the order passed by the single bench of the Court, whereby it had upheld the order of the Registrar to restrain the Petitioner from exercising their power in the Society concerned.

The case of the Appellant/Petitioner was that the respondents had filed an election dispute before the Registrar Co-operative Society, Bhopal challenging their election to the Board of Directors. During the pendency of the dispute, an application was filed by the respondents therein under OVII R11 R/W Section 151 CPC, seeking dismissal of the petition. While considering the said application, an interim direction was issued by the Registrar concerned, to the effect that new members would not be admitted. It was further directed that they were not to allot plot to any new members or take any policy decision.

Aggrieved by the order of the Registrar, the Appellant filed a petition before the Court. The single bench, however, found no illegality in the impugned order. The Court, vide order dated 15.02.2022, held that-

Registrar Cooperative Society, Bhopal (MP) is ceased with election dispute between the parties. During pendency of proceedings interim directions were issued that no new members will be made in Society neither any allotment of plot will be made to new members and no registry shall be done. Such direction given by Registrar Cooperative Society, Bhopal will not prejudice petitioner or respondents but said directions will serve the interest of Society in preserving the property.

In view of same, I do not find any illegality or error of jurisdiction in order passed by Registrar Cooperative Society, Bhopal (MP), hence, writ petition filed by petitioner is dismissed.

The Appellant, thus, challenged the order of the single bench before the Court.

Considering the facts of the case, the Court noted that the Registrar was only concerned with the election dispute. Therefore, it was not within their domain to pass such an interim order-

Primarily, it could be seen that the dispute pending before the Registrar is with regard to the election of the writ petitioner and others to the Board of Directors. Therefore, the Registrar is concerned only with the election dispute. It is needless to say that in an election petition no such interim direction of any nature could have been issued by the concerned authority. Whether it prejudices anybody or it is in the interest of the society or not, the power cannot be exercised by the concerned authority in an election petition.

The Court opined that it was not that the members could not have sought for such a relief against the contesting respondents. However, it observed, such an application would have to be made to the concerned authority in a manner known to law. The Court further noted-

Primarily, we are of the view that the Registrar who is trying the election dispute is exercising the power of the election tribunal. Therefore, he could not have passed orders even though it is in the interest of society. Therefore, we deem it just and necessary that the said order be set aside. However, liberty is always reserved to the respondents to make requisite application before the concerned authority for necessary relief in order to protect the members, the property or for any other issue of the like nature.

With the aforesaid observations, the Court set aside the order passed by the single bench, and also the order passed by the Registrar. Having held that, the Court reserved the liberty of the Respondents to file requisite application seeking appropriate relief before appropriate authority.

Case Title: VIKAS TIWARI v. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ORS.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (MP) 54