- (1.) Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioners. The two petitioners, who claim to be the members of Sadhan Sahkari Samiti Limited, Sakarpura, Development Block Bansdeeh, District Ballia, pray for quashing of the no confidence motion proceedings that had been tabled against the respondent No. 4 so as to remove him from the post of President of the said Samiti. A no confidence motion in such matters is undisputedly governed by the Uttar Pradesh Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961 and the relevant Rule is Rule 458(1) quoted hereunder: 458. (1) On receipt of the notice of no confidence as provided in Rules 456 and 457, the specified authority shall fix such time, date and place as, he may consider suitable for holding a meeting for the purpose of consideration of the proposed no confidence motion: Provided that such meeting shall be held within thirty-five days of the receipt of the notice of no confidence: Provided further that at least twenty-one day's notice shall be given for holding such meeting. The writ petition was filed categorically stating that notices were sought to be served without giving 21 days clear notice as envisaged under Rule 458(1) of the 1968 rules.
(2.) Consequently, framing the said question be answered by this Court an order was passed on 25.2.2014 calling upon the learned Standing Counsel to furnish the original records before the Court for the purpose of consideration of the issue so raised with a direction that the no confidence motion which was scheduled for 26.2.2014 may be held but the results shall not be declared.
(3.) The members, who had tabled the no confidence motion, had been made party respondents in the writ petition and they were also directed to be served. An affidavit of service has been filed indicating service of notice on the respondents No. 8 to 10 and refusal by the respondents No. 5 to 7.;