WP(C) 4975/2009 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASOK POTSANGBAM Heard Mr. J.U.N.M. Laskar, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mrs. V.L.Singh, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the State-respondents a s well as Dr. B.Ahmed, learned counsel for the private respondent No. 6. Affidavits on behalf of the respondents have filed, one for the Govt. an d another for the private respondents. It is stated by the petitioner that he offered himself as a candidate fo r election to the office of Chairman of Rajyeshapur Co-operative Society Ltd, Ha iklakandi. As per the schedule provided in the notice for election, nomination paper of the intending candidates was to be filled on 10.11.2009 before the Ret urning Officer and thereafter, scrutiny of the nomination papers was to be held on the following day i.e. 11.11.2009. After scrutiny was over, the names of the validly nominated candidate were published by the Returning officer on the day of the scrutiny itself and the names of the respondent Nos. 6 and the petitioner were shown at Serial No. 2 and 3 respectively. The grievance of the petitioner is that after the list of candidates for the office of the Chairmanship was published, a complaint was lodged by the res pondent No. 6 making several allegations, viz, double membership of A class memb er in one holding and the father of the petitioner being an agent/ dealer of the society was within the expression of interested in the transaction of the Soci ety etc. and thereafter the Asstt. Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Hailaka ndi, passed the impugned order dated 13.11.2009 ( Annexure-7 to the writ petitio n) cancelling the nomination of the petitioner for the office of Chairmanship o f Rajyeswarpur Somabai Samittee. Affidavits were filed by the respondents as wel l as reply affidavit by the petitioner. In the writ petition, the petitioner has also raised the question of jurisdictional incompetency of the Asstt. Registrar to issue the impugned order dated 13.11.2009, interpretation of the provision of bye-laws U/S 22(1)(v) of the Goan Panchayat Samabai Samittee (for short G.P .S.S.Ltd) and also the bye-laws under Sections 22 (i) vi and 22(i)vii and other related provisions. Mrs. V.L.Singh, learned Govt. Advocate has submitted that there is a statutory r emedy available to the petitioner to challenge the impugned order dated 13.11 .2009, issued by the Asstt. Registrar of Co-operative Society, Hailakandi, unde r Section 80 of the Assam Co-operative Society Act. Therefore, it is for the pet itioner to first exhaust the statutory remedy before coming to this Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that despite the availability of alternative remedy, this Court can still entertain this writ petition, It is true that there is no bar for this Court to entertain an application under Artic le 226 of the Constitution of India despite availability of alternative remedy. However, this Court, normally, shall restrain itself from invoking its discretio nary jurisdiction, particularly, in cases where there is a statutory remedy prov ided as an appellate authority in the Registrar of Co-operative Society, who is fully equipped to deal and decide such nature of case. In that view of the matte r, I am not inclined to invoke the discretionary jurisdiction of this Court. For the reasons discussed hereinabove, it is provided that the petitioner shall be at liberty to file an appeal against the impugned order dated 13.11.2009 (Ann exuree-7 to the writ petition) before the Registrar of Co-operative Society, Gov t. of Assam, within a period of three (3) weeks from today. The Registrar, Co-op erative Society shall consider and dispose of the appeal, after giving notice to the concerned parties within a period of two (2) months from the date of filing of the Memo of appeal as indicated. It is made clear that the election to the o ffice of the Chairmanship of Rajyeshapur Co-operative Society Ltd., Hailakandi s hall not be held till the appeal is disposed of by the Registrar, as directed ab ove, if the appeal is filed within the time stipulated above. The writ petition stands disposed of with the above observation and direction. N o costs.