news details |
|
|
| DB dismisses appeal with costs of Rs 50,000 | | | Jammu, Nov 9 (JNF): A Division Bench of State High Court Jammu Wing comprising Chief Justice MM Kumar and Justice Mohd Yaqoob Mir has dismissed the appeal filed by erstwhile Managing Committee of the Sainik Cooperative Housing Building Society against the judgment of Single Judge whereby the Writ Court dismissed the petition with the costs of Rs 50,000/-.
This approved for reporting judgment written by Justice Mohd Yaqoob Mir for the Division Bench observed that clandestine move of the petitioners erstwhile Managing Committee of Sainik Cooperative Housing Building Society attracts applicability of the proverb "Greediness is Curse" obvious consequence of which is to be in the lurch. The petitioners were elected as Members of the Managing Committee of Sainik Cooperative Housing Building Society on July 24, 2008 for the term of three years.
The Deputy Registrar Cooperative Societies noticing that the statutory period of three years of the erstwhile managing committee (petitioners) has expired on July 24, 2011 invoked the powers vested in him under sub section 4 of the section 29 of the Act appointed administrator till the election for the management of Society are held. Upon this the petitioners filed a petition seeking quashment of the order passed by the Deputy Registrar where under the returning officer was advised to post-pone the election. During pendency of the said petition Registrar Cooperative Societies ordered on August 14, 2012 announced the administrator. The petitioners filed one more petition seeking quashment further more have prayed that respondents shall be restrained from interfering with working of the Managing Committee.
Division Bench further observed that the petitioners, thus, have no locus to challenge the appointment of administrator or to claim to sit in office beyond the period of three years and dismissed the appeal with the observation that impugned judgment in terms whereof petition had been dismissed costs amounting to Rs 50,000 have been imposed does not call for any interference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
