K.S. PADWAL Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this writ petition is to order dated 06-07-2013 issued by the Returning Officer, the Sainik Cooperative House Building Society Ltd, respondent No. 4 herein, rejecting the nomination papers of petitioner for election to the Managing Committee of the Society. The facts, as averred in the writ petition, are that for conducting election to the Sainik Cooperative House Building Society Ltd, Jammu (hereinafter, for short, the Society), Registrar Cooperative Societies, respondent No. 2 herein, set in motion the electoral process and fixed the date for election as 15-07-2013, while respondent No. 4 was appointed as Returning Officer for conducting the said election. It is averred that as the petitioner being a share holder and founder member of the society was also eligible to contest the election, he also filed his nomination papers, but were rejected by respondent No. 4 vide order impugned in terms of Rules 18(ff) and 25(1) of Jammu and Kashmir Co-operative Societies Rules, 2001 (hereinafter, for short, Rules of 2001).

(2.) Objections have been filed on behalf of respondents. Respondents while maintaining their stand contended that the candidature of petitioner was rejected on two counts. The first one was in terms of Rule 18(ff) read with Rule 25(i)(e) of the Rules of 2001, which provides that a person who has held the office of any Society for three years shall not be eligible for being re-elected or re-appointed as an office bearer until a period of three years has elapsed from the date of vacating his office as such officer. It is contended that the petitioner earlier had served as a Chairman of the Society, therefore, his nomination papers have rightly been rejected. Further, it is contended that the election to the Society is now being conducted as per the amended Election Rules under SRO 236 of 2013 [Refer 2013 (17) JKS JK-261].

(3.) The second ground of rejection of the candidature of petitioner was in terms of Rule 25(1)(b) of the Rules of 2001, which provides that no person shall be eligible for appointment/election as a member of the committee of Co-operative Society, if he has directly or indirectly any interest in any subsisting contract made with the Society or in any property sold or purchased by the society or in any other transaction of the society, except in an investment made or in any loan taken from the society. Relying on this rule position, it is contended that the petitioner is debarred from contesting the election of the Society as he had directly purchased a shop from the Society against payment.