- (1.) THIS writ petition has been preferred for issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 12-5-2007 passed by respondent no. 3 (Annexure No,5) whereby no con fidence motion was passed against the petitioner by members of Gularbhoj Dirghakar Bahuuddaishiya Sahkari Samiti, i. e. respondent no. 3 society and the respondent no. 4 was elected as chairman of the society.
(2.) THE impugned order has been as sailed mainly on the ground that the no tice for no confidence motion was pre sented before the District Magistrate, i. e. respondent no. 1, on 12-4-2007 and the meeting of no confidence motion was held on 12-5-2007 after expiry of period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the notice and thus, the meeting is null and void. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the mandatory pro vision of Rule 481 (1) of the Uttaranchal Cooperative Society Rules, 2004 (for short the Rules) has been violated. In para no. 13 of the writ peti tion is has been contended that on 29-3-2007 the District Assistant Registrar Cooperative Society Uttarakhand passed an order by which the name of the nominated members have been with drawn and on 6-3-2007 a condolence meeting was held in the Society due to sudden death of Sri Maan Singh the members of Board of Director which shows the vacancy of two members arose on 6-3-2007 and 24-3-2007. True copies of the minutes of the meeting dated 6-3-2007 and 29-3-2007 have been annexed as Annexure No. 6 with the writ petition.
(3.) IT has been stated in paragraph no. 14 of the writ petition that accord ing to Rule 471 of the Rules the com mittee of management has to fill-up the vacancy by co-option within 30 days but the society has failed to do so and af ter expiry of 30 days, the Registrar Co operative Society also not filled up the same and not followed Rule 471, hence the requisite quorum of 2/3rd members were not present to pass resolution of no confidence motion, therefore, the reso lution passed in the meeting itself is null and void. Counter Affidavit has been filed by the respondent nos. 3 and 4 and Re joinder Affidavit was also filed by the petitioner in reply thereto.;