@W‘ £5 HIGH COURT OE CHHA'L“’i‘1SGARH AT BILA$PUR i’ETI'I‘IONER WRIT PETITION (C) No. 4480 019607 Tikumm Yadav son 0f Danuram aged about 51 years; Director/Member P rimary Krishi Sahakari Saakh Society Maryadit, Nwari: District Dhamtari. VERS”S RESPONBENTS : l. The Regmmr Co operauve Somety, RaJpur Dlst aipul (C G) 2. Shh Vljay Kumar Yadav, Retummg Officer/Gramm Vikas Vistam' Adhikari, Janpad Panchayat, Kurud, District Dhamtari. 3‘ $ukhchand Patel, AdhyaksWChairman, Viilage Nwari, Block Kurud, District Dhamtari. Pawan Kumar Yadava Upadhyaksh/Vice Chairman, ViHage Aii‘wari, Biock Kui'ud, District Dhamtari. 5. Rohitram Yadav, Representative of Zila Sahakari Kendriya Bank, Raipur, Vglage Arlwari, Block Kumd, District Dhamtari. 6. Ramesh Tandem Representative, Upbhokm Bhandar, Raipur, Viliage Kalle, PEG. Anwari, Block Kumd, District Dhamtm‘i. 7. Nandkumar Satnami Representative Marketing Btmeh, Rumd Village & Post Anwan Block Ixurud District Dhamtan 8. Hernia} Nxrmalkar Representative of sakha Suraksha Sangh. Raipui Viiiage & l’osi Anwan Biock Kuwd District Dhamtan 9 iokesh Kumar Gaikwad, Representative. House Construeticm Villace Anwari Post Anwari Block Kurud, District Dhamtan a’) Lekmam Smhu Repiesemative Viliage Anwm Post Anwari Block Kurud District Dhdmtari WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTH'UTION OF INDIA SB: Hon’ble Shri Satislx K. Agnihotri, J. Present: Shri Dimes R.K.Tiwari, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Amn Sac). Govemment Advocate for the State/respondent No.1 Shri B.D.Guru, Advocate for the respondent No. 2 to 10. ORDER ORAL) (Passed on 13 day of July, 2009) Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks following reliefs: “7.1. The Hon’ble Court may be pleased to call for the records regarding election process before this Hon’hle Court. 7.2. This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to qush the entire process in respeet of election of President/Vice n Presédent/Representatives to be sent in other societies and othe offmers in the facts arid circumstances ofthe case. 7.3. Cost ofthe petition ma also be granted. 7.4. Any other relief which this Hon’bie Court may deem fit irl the facts and circumstances cfthe case.” 2. The election process has already taken place on 04.()6.20()7, thus, the reiief sought for in this petition has become infructuous. The issue raised herein cannot be adjudicated upon in abstract as the election has already taken place. 3. It is well-settled principle of law that if there is a provision for election petition, no writ is maintainable. (See NRPonmzswami v. Tke Returning 017%er Namakkal Comrz‘im‘ency, Namakkal Saleem Disi. and others], Mohindar Singh Gill and another v. The ChiefEZectior/z Commissioner, New Delhi & Othersz, Indrajit Bamcz & Others v. Eieciion Commission of India and others3 and Manda Jaggmnaih v. K.S.Rathnam and others", Avtar Singh Hit v. Delhi Sikh Gurua‘wara Management Committee & Othersj and Gtlrdeep Singh Dhilion V. Satpaf and others? 4. In View of the foregoing and for the reasons mentioned hereinabove, the wn't petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. However, If the yetitioner has any grievance, the petitioner may take recourse to election petition under the provisions of iaw i.e under section 64 (2) (v) of the Chhattisgarh Co—operative Societies Act, 1960, if so advised. sci/— 1 Satish K.Agnihetri ; Judge z ‘ may) 1952 sc 64 1 (1987) 1 SCC 405 4 AIR 1986 SC 103 (2004) ’7 SCC 492 5 (2006) s soc 487 5 (2005) 10 soc 616 r