:'s-sSKl^^sX8 S./''y ',:1:' ^ :'.' '• Kii^lS^^^SStZ&^,:.":':.':: • -datsd..""--'-ft"""'^::v,r;:'.,:^ ^ /-, .' ;:.••••——— -—--^,. ^T^?37.: :..:.'<.-....: :1':':?^ IN'THE^IQliSiSiHI©Hl^©BTR'^^T<CHHATTlSGA^tt a:::;:;:^:y^Af-?]^iismnc;iiHi'ii[1^ |wil(ilNo^o>of^20i;0. PETTnONER :/"tJaswa^ Singh ^mani, S/^ late^ Shri Munshirarn ^ aged ^oi3j: 6^ ^iiiajai Tent Hpuse^MaiR Dayalbaiid, Bilaspur (<2.Q^) Ex Directdr M,P. Goveriiinent Employees Housing^^^^^^^^^^^ C^ pperative Society Ltd., Bilaspur .(c.m^:':;;:'''::-' ? •Versus ' TT-'?^*"~.::' RE^RQNI)ENTS^ :1) C.K^Hela, President M.P, ©overnment Emgloyees Housiiig ed-operative, Soeiety :':^'y'l-,ffi^' near ' Mission Higll School, Rajeh<ara Nagar, Bila^pur^(^ :2) Joinf Registrar, Gb-operatw Societies, Bilaspur (C.G.^ :3) ' <36-operative Miniater, ^ ^^^^^^^^^^^ l^ Government of.^C^ 0.E.S.Bhavan, Raipur (C,©.) WRITI^1^I<iNfflNS^i^^ (^NiSt^^ 1. PARn^I^AiRSlaE^MEEE'nTIQNER^ As above iri the cause title. & 2. PARTICIIJIJ^^^I^HE RESPONI3ENTS: ^ As abcwe in^tlie eause tltle. BSI B ^•'f. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONER WRITPETITIONfC) No. 5579 of2010 Jaswant Singh Ajmani. VERSUS RESPONDENTS C.K.Hela & Others. WMT PETITION UNDERARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF JNDIA SB: Hon'bleShri SatishK. Asnihotri. J. Present: ShriH.B.Agrawal, Senior Advocate withMs. Pragya Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Anup Majiundar, Advocate forthe respondentNo. 1. Shri Shashank Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent No.2and3. ORDERfORAL) (Passed on 09th day of December, 2010) 1. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 14.09.2010 (Annexure P/l) passed by the Minister, Cooperative Societies Department, Goveniment of Chhattisgarh, whereby it has been observedthat the tenn of managing committee of M.P. Goveniment Employees Housing Cooperative Society, has come to an end on 12.06.2010. Accordmgly, it was directed that the process-of election should commence to elect new Board ofDirectors, within a period ofthree months. 2. Shri Agrawal, leamed senior counsel appearfng withMs. Pragya Singh, Advocate for the petitioner, submits fhat under fhe Rules of Business, there is no provision to hear and consider the appeal by the ui-charge Minister and pass order under his signature. Secondly, no appeal is maintainable against fhe order passed by the Joint Registrar mrevision. —" 3. Leamed counsel appearing for the State/respondent No. 2 and 3 submits that under the provisions of section 78 of the Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies Act, 1960, any order passed by Registrar, Joint Registrar is appelable to the Tribunal. Since there is no Tribunal in existence, thus.the order is appellable to the State Govemment. Under the Rules of Business, the Miaister is competent to hear (he appeal, but orders are nonnally passed under the signature of the Secretary to the Govemment of the concemed Department, and ffot by the Minister. He further submits that it may be, at the most, irregularity, but in no case, it can be held as illegal as the State Govemment has to hear the matter and pass the order. Shri Thakur further submits that by notification, it has been made clear that if the Tribunal is not in f' existence, the appeal is maintamable to the State Govemment. 4. Be that as it may, without going into the merits of the case, particularly on the issue asto whether the appeal again^t the order passed in revision is maintainable to the State Govemment or not, in view ofthe facts ofthe case, it is not necessary to decide the issue which has become academic. 5. This Court, relying on the observations made by theSupreme Court in Basheshar Nath v. Commissioner 6f Income-tca, Delhi and Rajasthan and another , Dhartipakar Madan Lal Agarwal v. Rajiv Gandhi, Secretary, Ministry oflnformation & 'Broadcasting, Govt. -!!• of India and others v. Cricket Association of Bengal and others , 'AIR (1959)8ci49 2(I987)Supp.SCC93 \2SCC16I f^~\ Vv^ ^•sa^^ Amit State ofManipw and others v. Chandam Manihar Singh, Arnit Das v. State ofBihat, Prakash Singh Badal and another v. State ofPvnjab and others , m Tritiya Verg Shaskiya Karamchari Grih Nirman Samiti Maryadit v. The Chhattisgarh Information Commission & Others , held that questibn of law of academic interest cannot be adjudicated upon. 6. The tenn ofthe Board ofDirectors has come to an end on 12.06.2010. Thus, election ofthe Board ofDirectors has become necessary to have proper duly elected Directors to form Board ofDirectors. 7. Election is the basic foundation oflndian democracy. All the vacancy ofBoard of Directors are to be filled up by election and once the 1» election has been ordered, there is no reason to restrain the same on the ground that some illegality has been committed. 8. In view ofthe foregoing, the petition is dismissed as havuig become inlhictuous and academic question may be decided in an appropriate case. 9. No order asto costs. Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge 4 (1999) 7 SCC503 5 (2001) 7 SCC 657 6'(2007)1SCC1 7 Writ Petition (C) No 4313 of2008, decided on 11/08/2008