Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. - (1.) HEARD learned senior counsel Mr. V. Shivnath for the petitioner and learned J.C. to G.P. 1 for the Respondents.
(2.) IN this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 20.04.2001, passed by respondent No. 2 in Election Dispute No. 3 of 2000 as well as the order dated 7.7.2006, passed by respondent No. 3 in Misc. Appeal No. 197 of 2003. The petitioner, who was working as a Co -operative Extension Officer, Jamshedpur Circle, Jamshedpur in the year 2000, was appointed as an Election Officer by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies cum Conducting Officer, Jamshedpur, for conducting the election of the Managing Committee of Tisco Tube Division, Co -operative Society, Limited, Jamshedpur. Besides the petitioner, an Observer and other members were also appointed so that fair election be held. On 5.12.2000, the elections were held and upon counting the votes, results were declared and 8 committee members were declared elected out of 23 contestants, in which one Braj Nandan Prasad had secured 408 votes, whereas one Mohan Pandey had secured 361 votes. Certificate was also issued by the petitioner in his capacity as an Election Officer to the elected members of Tisco Tubes Employees Credit Co -operative Society Limited, Jamshedpur. An Election Dispute Case was filed by one Mohan Pandey, who had contested the election for the post of Member of Managing Committee, before the District Co -operative Officer, Singhbhum West, Chaibasa, with a prayer to set aside the election and result of Shri Braj Nandan Prasad. The case, which was registered as Election Dispute No. 3 of 2000 was heard on 4.1.2001 and notices were issued to the said Braj Nandan Prasad and subsequent thereto by order dated 11.04.2001, the District Cooperative Officer passed an order for recounting of votes. A writ application was preferred by the said Braj Nandan Prasad being CWJC No. 1473 of 2001 as the date for recounting of votes was fixed on 18.04.2001 but the said writ application was subsequently withdrawn. A final order was passed on 20.07.2001 in the said Election Dispute No. 3 of 2001, in which aspersions were cast upon the petitioner that since the petitioner was related to Braj Nandan Prasad, he had deliberately and wrongfully counted votes in favour of Braj Nandan Prasad which he had not polled. Resultantly, the order dated 20.04.2001 passed by the District Co -operative Officer also indicated that in future in the election of Co -operative Society, the petitioner shall not be appointed as an Electoral Officer and that the petitioner should be proceeded against departmentally for his acts of omission and commission during his role as an Election Officer in the election of Tisco Tube Division Co -operative Credit Society Limited, Jamshedpur. The order dated 20.04.2001 was challenged before the Registrar, Co -operative Society, Jharkhand, Ranchi being Appeal Case No. 197 of 2003, who, vide order dated 7.7.2006 had affirmed the order of the District Co -operative Officer and had recommended for initiation of a departmental proceeding and that in future the petitioner should not be allowed to conduct the election in Cooperative Societies.
(3.) LEARNED senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that neither the District Co -operative Officer nor the Registrar, Cooperative Societies had the power under Section 48 of the Bihar Cooperative Societies Act, 1935 to debar the petitioner from taking part in the election process or to recommend a departmental proceeding against the petitioner. It has been submitted that Section 48 of the Bihar Co -operative Societies Act does not give power to the authorities to recommend initiation of a departmental proceeding and the same in case of election is restricted to the election dispute only and not beyond that. It has further been submitted that the provision under Section 48 of the Act has not been properly considered either by the District Co -operative Officer or the Registrar, Co -operative Society and that they had exceeded their jurisdiction while passing the impugned orders dated 20.04.2001 and 7.7.2006.;