86 15 CWP N08990 of 2009 1 ln thcHighCourl ofPunjab andHaryana CWP No9990 of 2009 OMl DateofDecision 43072010 SatnoinSingh Petitioner s VcrsUS C Stalcof Punjaband othcrs 0 Respotldents 43 CWP N9999 of2009 O8iN C5 Chtllllllll Singh I etitioner Z Vcesus StalcofPunjab a0ndotllers lespOlldcnts 4 I e5 Corum IluribleMr JustlccAlok Siilgh 7 1 Whethcrreportersoflocal news papersmay be allowcd to scc Z 2 Yeo 2 To be refcrredto reportcrsor not 7 Y 3 Whether shouWbereported in the Digest2 Y Prcsciltl Mr MS KangAdvocate for thc petitioncr Mr BI3STeji Sr DAG Punjab for tllc State Mr VipulDharmani Advocatc for thc private Alok SinghJ Pctitioncrshavc invoked jurisdictionof this Court under Articlcs2261227of thc Constitutionof India seekingwrit of certiorari for Il n Singh Gagan Preet 2014.03.27 16:02 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGINAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 87 ll 50 CWl No9990 of 2009 2 tollc ordersdated2382007 31 102008 and 932009 posscdby thc Joint N3 Additlonal No2 and thc Financial Commissioncr GovcmmcntofPunjab No 13rief facts of the present case arc tllat petoncr afld 1 NoA are individual shareholdermeinbersof the Nawonsllahar tr SugarMi ll Ltd Nawanshaharwhich is rcgisteted tiildct tlle 0 0 ProvlsIons of the Punjab SocietiesAct 1961 lclCllltlftcr C5 refcrrcdto as thc Act Election prograinmeofthe BoardofDircctorsofthe I Mill for 2006 was and as per tllc electionprogramine nominalon Z popcrswere to be flled bcfore the OfOccr Oll 202006 5t 0 wcrc to be flled on 21 2006 andscrutiny of the paperswas to bc madc011 222006 Petitioners as well as NoAllcd their 08 IlOllllllatIonpapers Nomination papersof NoA were 1Cjccll bytllc OfOceron the ground tllal tlheproposcr had IlOl 85Io of bondcdsugar cane and the proposer of respletlt Noo was Ll pcrson Petitoionerswere dcclaied successfIilltIle elecliotlsas Fccling froin therciectionof thc IOaPcrs and bydcclaring the petitioners as the winningcandidatcs No4 inadca rcferenceof dispute undcr Section55 of the Act rcad with Rule 51 and Rule 1221ofthe Punjab SocietiesRulcs 19636hercillallct rcferrcdto as the Rulcs9 No3 decidedthc rcfcrcnce vidc oidei dated2382007 therebyaccepting the referenceinade by NoA hcrCllle Thc Joint Registrar No herein Ilas held lhat tlle allcgcddcfaultcrsof Byelaw106Xltnay bc declared disqualifled lo coil test 1V 1e Singh Gagan Preet 2014.03.27 16:02 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGINAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 88 1 0 CWP No990 of 2009 3 lhc clectionshowevcrhe cannot be saidto bc as thc proposcr of anothercandidate The Joint Registraralso observcdthat there 1S 110 prOVlS1011 lll thebyelaws which mandatessupplyof 85010bondcdsugar cone to tllc mill as a coildition to becomea caondidatc Fceling frotn the ordcr passcdbylhc Joint Rcgistrar 1 slatutory appeal undcrScctl 68cl ofthc Ac was wllicll was C dccidcdvidc dated31 102008 Mattcr was fuithcrcarricdin tllc 0 CAb shapcof revlSlOll before No l and Nol illso C5 dismissedthcrevlsionvidcorderdated9 2009 Mr Kang Iearnedcouilse for thc pctllIlOllCrS 2 tIrel tllat under tllebylaws ofthe SugarMill all thetlcmbciesoftolc Stigaj 2 C Mills arc dutybound to supply 85 oflhe bondedsugar canc to sugarinill Ilc furtherargued that the defaultcr who had Ilol supplied 85010of tolle 08 bondcdsugar cane to the sugar mill is to bc electcdas 0 mcmbcr and IS furthcr to be a proposer lll tllc clcctiOllS Ilc 7 Z fiirthcr orgued that tiInewas grantedbythe Omccr to Qm NoA andhis proposer to prove that he Ilas supjol ied 850Ioof the boundcd Sllgorcatlc to tlle sugar Mills Ilowever despiteof tiine beinggrantcd Ilotlliilgwas beforc the Rcturning Ofllccr ancl hcncc the Rctuming Officer was well within his to rcjccttllC llOilllnatioll plipcrs NoA lle hasalso placed relianceon theudgcincillOf thcApcxCourtin thelnattei of BrijlvlohanVs Sat Pal AlR 1985Suprenle 1 Court 847 ln contra Mr VipulDharinani Iearncdcoutlsel fl Illc IlilIate1 arguedthat tIlere is no bylawswhicll mandatcsto supply85 of bondecl sugar canc to thc SugarMills and iloilsupplytllcrcof can disquolytllc meinbcrto coiltcstoelectiollsoi to becoillc tlle liojooscl iil lillc Pl el Singh Gagan Preet 2014.03.27 16:02 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGINAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 89 J 0 CWP No9990 of 2009 4 tlolllitlalon papers of other caildidate He Ilas placcdrelianceOll the ofa Division Benchofthis Court in the inattcr ofKuldecloSiilghi Vs Statcof Punjab1994PLJ 268 He hasfurtherplaccdrcliailcc oll thc of a learnedSingleJudgeof this Court in tllc Illattocrof Pala SinghVs StateofPunjab1976PLJ 211 1 lllavingheard Iearnedcounselfor the particsthis Coutt 1Sf r Ilndoull as to whetherthereis aily under the Act Rulcs or bylaws 0 0 madcthereunder prescribing of t proposer of a candidatc I t5 Oll bcingasked Mr Kangwas not able to producc any proViSlOO I undcrtheAct Rulesor bylaws the ofthe prOlOOSCl Z 0f thc candidatein the elections He argued thata pcrson who faiIcd Io supply85Io of the bonded sugar canc to tllc SugarMills IS I to be ilotnlnatedas a lllClllber hence hc is also to 08 becoinca proposerofanother candidate ln the inatter of Brij Nlohan supraltllc Apex Cotlrtowas 7 Z dcaling with the undertohe ofthe PeoplcAct In lohc tl Ioccul iar ofactsand ci rcumstances of Brij Mohanls case supralthc Apex Courthasheldthat theRetulg OfOcerin the aforesa case was jlistiOcd Ill the nominationpapersof thecandidatc on tllc groundthattllc calldldatccould not show the names of hiinsclf and thc proposer in the clccloralroll The ratioof 13rljMohails case suloialis ilot to tlle prcsentcasc This Court in the case of KuldeepSillgll lpra ill l l haviilg discusscdentire proonas held lhat tlle t dcfaulthas nothing10 do with a persoil Who prOloOseslhe name of anotllcr as a candidate V Singh Gagan Preet 2014.03.27 16:02 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGINAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 90 ri1 ci CWP No990 of 2009 5 ln thc case of Pala Singhsupralthc lcarned SiilgleJudgehas also Ileld that or clefaulthasnothing to do willll thc Pcrson Wlloproposesthe ilaine ofanyothercandidates Hatling tlle record I am of thc view tllot iil theabscnce of aily provision undei theAct Rules or bylaws a person to be t to become a proposer of another candidatc cannot said to be Q disquali Iled tlo bccomea proposer inerely becausc hc Ilasfailcd to supply 0 C 85Ioof the bondedsugar cane to the SugarMills Morcovcr Mr Katlg I C COtildnot placeOll record any bylowsof the Socicty to supply 850 ofthe boondedsugar caile to SugarMoillsto acquircligibilitIto c0111cst Z thc clcctions or to stand proposcr of anothercandidate the clectio f Petition is dcvoid ofincrit andhenceis disinisscd a5 A photocopy of the orderbe placed on thc fi Ic of conncctcd e COSC m Z Il QW Allgll 1 Judgc sk AI pdrl 69 SlmI f1 14149 41 r 40 1 40 01 1 4 r Singh Gagan Preet 2014.03.27 16:02 TRUE SCANNED COPY OF ORIGINAL PHHC CHANDIGARH JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document