- (1.) We have heard Shri Sanjeev Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4, and perused the record. The present writ petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, praying that the election of the respondent No. 6 held on 29.10.2012 as Member of the Cooperative Society in question be cancelled.
(2.) Learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 has raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner has an alternative remedy under Rule 444C of the U.P. Co-operative Societies Rules, 1968 framed under the U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 for challenging the election of the respondent No. 6 as Member of the Co-operative Society in question, and in the circumstances, no interference is called for by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
(3.) Shri Sanjeev Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the election of the respondent No. 6 as Member of the Co-operative Society in question was illegal, and, therefore, this Court may exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.;