- (1.) The cause shown for condonation of delay is good and sufficient. The application for condonation of delay is allowed.
(2.) This Special Appeal arises out of judgment of learned Single Judge dated 05.05.2014,, by which he has dismissed the writ petition, raising a dispute with regard to the elections of the Board of Directors of the Rajasthan Urban Cooperative Bank Limited, held on 08.06.2009, on the ground that the duly enrolled members, holding requisite number of shares for participating in the elections as voter, they were not allowed to vote. The writ petition was dismissed on the ground that the petitioner had challenged the elections before the Arbitrator in a dispute bearing No.40/2009, in which no interim order was passed, and now since the arbitration award has been passed on 06.11.2012, the writ petition has become infructuous as the order of the Arbitrator can be challenged in an appeal under Section 105 of the Rajasthan Cooperative Societies Act, 2001 (for short, "the Act of 2001"). The writ petition was thus dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy.
(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellants states that whereas the writ petition was dismissed on the ground that the appellants/petitioners had raised the dispute before Arbitrator, the Arbitrator had, in his order dated 06.11.2012, had failed to consider the matter on merits. He dismissed the dispute raised by the appellants on the ground that appellants had initially filed a Civil Suit, in which an application for temporary injunction was filed and in which, an application under Order 7 Rule 10 CPC was accepted on 03.06.2009, and the plaint was returned, to be presented before the competent authority. The appeal filed against the order was thereafter dismissed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge No.3, Jaipur City, Jaipur on 09.06.2009, along with the stay application. The Arbitrator further observed that a writ petition being Writ Petition No.4144/2010 (giving rise to this Special Appeal), is still pending in the High Court. He rejected the application on the ground that since the only prayer of the petitioners was, to stay the elections, and that the elections have already been held, the relief claimed by the petitioners did not survive.;