IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 7802/2011 alongwith CWPs No.8091, 8092, 8094, 8095, 8096, 8097, 8098, 8103, 8104, 8105, 8106, 8148, 8343, 8354 and 8355 of 2011. Decided on:22.9.2011 _____________________________________________ 1. CWP No. 7802/2011 Naresh Kumar Sharma. …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents 2. CWP No. 8091/2011 Munshi Ram. …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents 3. CWP No. 8092/2011 Anjana Dharmani. …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents 4. CWP No. 8094/2011 Ashok Kumar. …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents 5. CWP No. 8095/2011 Ashok Kumar. …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents 6. CWP No. 8096/2011 Anand Dharmani. …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents 2 7. CWP No. 8097/2011 Piar Singh Pathania. …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents 8. CWP No. 8098/2011 Manohar Lal. …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents 9. CWP No. 8103/2011 Lekh Ram. …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents 10. CWP No. 8104/2011 Ravinder Kapil. …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents 11. CWP No. 8105/2011 Radha Shyam. …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents 12. CWP No. 8106/2011 Rajinder Kumar. …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents 13. CWP No. 8148/2011 Chandan Chandel. …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents 14. CWP No. 8343/2011 Bishan Dass and others. …Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents. 3 15. CWP No. 8354/2011 Champa Devi and others. …Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents 16. CWP No. 8355/2011 Hushan Chand and others. …Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents ________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : Mr. K.B. Khajuria, Advocate in all the Petitions except in CWP Nos. 8343, 8354 and 8355 of 2011. Ms. Seema Guleria, Advocate in CWP Nos. 8343, 8354 and 8355 of 2011 For the Respondents: Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. A.G. for (in all the petitions) respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. Tarlok Chauhan and Dinesh Thakur, Advocates for respondent No.4. _____________________________________________________ Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral). Since common questions of law and facts are involved in all the petitions, the same are taken up together for hearing and are being disposed of by a common judgment. 2. Mr. K.B. Khajuria and Ms. Seema Guleria, Advocates jointly submit that the petitioners being old 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 4 members of the respondent-society have preferential right for undertaking the business of transportation. 3. An amendment has been carried out in the bye-laws of the respondent-society, which has been duly approved by the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Himachal Pradesh. In sequel to the amendment of the bye-laws, the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Himachal Pradesh has taken a decision on 25.8.2011 and has also decided to convene the General House of the respondent-society on 30.9.2011. 4. The Court is of the considered view that the prayer made by the petitioners shall also be considered by the respondent-society in the General House meeting by treating the prayer of the petitioners as agenda item to be discussed in the General House. The detailed directions the manner in which the General House is to be convened have already been issued by this Court in CWP No. 8102/2011, titled Bhuri Singh and another versus State of H.P. and others of even date. However, by way of abundant precaution, it is made clear that the petitioners shall give their demands in writing to the respondent-society, which will be treated as “agenda item”, to be discussed in the General House to be convened on 30.9.2011. 5 5. In view of above observations/directions, all the petitions are disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. No costs. A copy of this order, duly authenticated by the Court Master, be supplied to the petitioner. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. (Justice Rajiv Sharma), Judge. 22.9.2011 *awasthi*