IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15489 of 2010 RAKESH PANDEY, AT PRESENT CHAIRMAN PACS RARHIA, S/O LATE NAGESHWAR PANDEY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE LAURIA (ARERAJ), BLOCK-ARERAJ, PS. GOVINDGANJ, DISTRICT EAST CHAMPARAN…..PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE BIHAR STATE ELECTION AUTHORITY THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, BARRACK NO.11, OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA 2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, TIRHUT DIVISION, MUZAFFARPUR 3. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER-CUM-ELECTION, RARHIA PACS,BLOCK ARERAJ, DISTRICT–EAST CHAMPARAN 4. THE BLOCK CO-OPERATIVE EXTENSION OFFICER-CUM- DEPUTY ELECTION OFFICER, RARHIA PACS, BLOCK ARERAJ, DISTRICT EAST CHAMPARAN. 5. RARHIA, PRIMARY AGRICULTURE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT LAURIA, P.S. GOVINDGANJ, DISTRICT EAST CHAMPARAN 6. SHRI SHADANAND PANDEY, S/O LATE SATYANARAYAN PANDEY, R/O VILLAGE AND P.O. LAURIA, P.S. GOVINDGANJ, DISTRICT EAST CHAMPARAN 7. SMT. LALMUNI DEVI, W/O SHRI SHADANAND PANDEY, R/O VILLAGE LAURIA, P.S. GOVINDGANJ, BLOCK ARERAJ, DISTRICT EAST CHAMPARAN 8. SHRI NAWAL PANDEY, S/O SHRI RAM CHANDRA PANDEY, R/O VILLAGE & P.O. LAURIA, P.S. GOVINDGANJ, BLOCK, ARERAJ, DISTRICT EAST CHAMPARAN 9. DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE OFFICER, MOTIHARI, DISTRICT EAST CHAMPARAN. ……..RESPONDENTS. For the petitioner : Mr. Keshav Srivastava, Sr. Advocate . For respondent no.1 : Mr. Mukesh Kr. Thakur, Advocate. For respondent no.6 : Mr. Y.V.Giri, Sr. Advocate with Mr. R.Giri, Advocate. For respondent no.7 : Mr. Bindhyachal Singh, Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Prabha Singh, Advocate. ----------- O R D E R 09/ 20.12.2010 This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging order dated 30.08.2010 (Annexure-5) passed by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bihar by which his Appeal No.55 of 2010 was dismissed and order of the Joint - 2 - Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur (respondent no.2) dated 18.02.2010 (Annexure-4) by which Election Case No.12 of 2010 filed by respondent no.6 was allwed and for other ancillary reliefs. 2. The short fact of the case is that election for Rarhia Primary Agriculture Co-operative Societies within Areraj Block in the district of East Champaran was held on 16.10.2009 after completing all the formalities, whereafter the votes were counted and result was declared on 18.10.2009. The petitioner contested for the post of Chairman of the said Society and he was declared elected and from 19.10.2009 he started functioning in that capacity. Against the said election, respondent no.6, who was a losing candidate, filed Election Case No.12 of 2010 before the Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur who allowed the said petition vide impugned order dated 18.02.2010 (Annexure-4) and directed recounting. Against the said order, petitioner filed Appeal No.55 of 2010 before the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bihar who rejected the said appeal vide order dated 30.08.2010 (Annexure-5). 3. The objection raised by respondent no.6 as well as the claim of the writ petitioner and the materials produced by them were fully considered by both the authorities and they concurrently found that in the aforesaid election, the election authorities had not followed the specific provision with regard to such election and the objection raised by respondent no.6 - 3 - regarding re-election was wrongly ignored, as no valid reason could be given for rejection of the same, although such matter of re-election was very serious in nature and should have been proceeded as per the specific provision. Both the authorities were concurrently satisfied that there was irregularity in counting of ballot papers due to which the dispute had arisen, which cannot be properly resolved without ordering for recounting . 4. In view of the aforesaid concurrent findings of both the authorities, namely the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bihar as well as the Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur with regard to the irregularities and the necessity of recounting based upon the pleadings and the materials on record, this court does not find it legal and proper to interfere with the said orders. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. Harish (S.N. Hussain, J.)