The Fakiragram Samabai Samiti Ltd. and 2 Ors v. The State of Assam and 18 Ors. E

PageoNo.#o1/6 GAHC010031452023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWA/111/2023o THEoFAKIRAGRAMoSAMABAIoSAMITIoLTD.oANDo2oORS.o REPRESENTEDoBYoDIPAKoMAJUMDAR,oCHAIRMANoOFoTHEoSOCIETY,oP.O-o FAKIRAGRAM,oP.S.-oFAKIRAGRAM,oDIST.-oKOKRAJHAR,oBTC,oASSAM. 2:oDIPAKoMAJUMDAR oSONoOFoLATEoMADHUoSUDHANoMAJUMDAR VILLAGE-oPOCHAGAON UNDERoFAKIRAGRAMoPOLICEoSTATION DIST-oKOKRAJHAR 3:oJALALoUDDINoAHMED SONoOFoLATEoSOBAHANoALIoSHEIKH VILLAGE-oPAKHRIRTOAL UNDERoFAKIRAGRAMoPOLICEoSTATION DIST-oKOKRAJHAR oBTADoASSAM PIN-o783345o VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo18oORS.oEo REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoCOMMISSIONERoANDoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.o OFoASSAM,oCO-OPERATIONoDEPARTMENT,oGOVT.oOFoASSAM,oDISPUR,o GUWAHATI-6. 2:THEoBODOLANDoTERRITORIALoCOUNCIL oREPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoPRINCIPALoSECRETARY,oBTC KOKRAJHAR,oASSAM. 3:THEoREGISTRARoOFoCO-OPERATIVEoSOCIETIES,oASSAM oKHANAPARA oGUWAHATI-o22. PageoNo.#o2/6 4:THEoADDITIONALoREGISTRAR oCO-OPERATIVEoSOCIETIES oKOKRAJHARoDISTRICT oBTAD,oASSAM. 5:THEoASSISTANToREGISTRARoOFoCO-OPERATIVEoSOCIETIES oKOKRAJHARoDISTRICT oBTAD,oASSAM. 6:THEoRETURNINGoOFFICER oDEPUTEDoFORoELECTIONoINoTHEoYEARo2018oFORoFAKIRAGRAMoS.S.oLTD. oKOKRAJHAR oBTAD,oASSAM. 7:THEoSECRETARY oFAKIRAGRAMoS.S.oLTD. oKOKRAJHAR oBTADM,oASSAM. 8:CHINIoRAMoDAS oSONoOFoLATEoLALMOHANoDAS VILL-oDHPERTAL P.O.-oFAKIRAGRAM DIST.-oKOKRAJHAR BTAD,ASSAM 9:ALAUDDINoSHEIKH SONoOFoMOFAJULoHUSSAIN VILLAGE-oKASHIMARI P.O.-oFAKIRAGRAM DIST.-oKOKRAJHAR oBTAD,ASSAM 10:ZAKIRoHUSSAIN oSONoOFoLT.oSABIDoALI VILL.-oPAKHIRTAL P.O.-oFAKIRAGRAM DIST.-oKOKRAJHAR 11:SANTAoMANDAL oSONoOFoSURESHoMANDAL VILLAGE-oRABHAPARA o PageoNo.#o3/6 P.O.-oFAKIRAGRAM DIST.-oKOKRAJHAR BTADoASSAM 12:RITUoSEAL SONoOFoGAURoSEAL VILLAGE-oPACHAGARH P.O.-oFAKIRAGRAM DIST.-oKOKRAJHAR BTADoASSAM 13:CHANDRIKAoPRASHADoNATH oSONoOFoLT.oSHASHIoMOHANoNATH VILL-oDINGAON P.O.-oFAKIRAGRAM DIST.-oKOKRAJHAR BTADoASSAM 14:AJAYoKR.oNAG oSONoOFoKESHARIoMOHANoNAG VILL.oANDoP.O.-oFAKIRAGRAM DIST.-oKOKRAJHAR oBTADoASSAM 15:ABDULoALIM oSONoOFoLT.oABDULoHAMID VILL-oKALJHAR P.O.-oFAKIRAGRAM DIST.-oKOKRAJHAR oBTADoASSAM 16:MATIYARoRAHMAN oSONoOFoMEHERoALI VILL-oPAKHIRTAL P.O.-oFAKIRAGRAM DIST.-oKOKRAJHAR 17:ATULoCHANDRAoBARMAN oSONoOFoBHEDANGoBARMAN VILL-oBHUBANoNAGAR o Page No.# 4/6 P.O.- PRATAP KHATA P.S. - FAKIRAGRAM DIST.- KOKRAJHAR BTAD ASSAM PIN-783337. 18:ANOWAR HUSSAIN SON OF LT. JOYNULLAH SK VILL-KOKAITARY P.O.- FAKIRAGRAM P.S.- FAKIRAGRAM DIST.- KOKRAJHAR BTAD,ASSAM PIN-783345. 19:RAHIMUDDIN SK. SON OF HABEJUDDIN SK. VILL-KHARIDAR SANDLA P.O.- FAKIRAGRAM P.S.- FAKIRAGRAM DIST.- KOKRAJHAR BTAD ASSAM PIN-783345 For the Appellants : Mr.M.U. Mahmud, Advocate.

For respondents : Mr. G. Bordoloi, Standing Counsel, Co-operation Department. Mr. S.R. Rabha, Standing Counsel, BTC.

– BEFORE – HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA

11.04.2023

The instant writ appeal has been preferred by the appellants for assailing the order dated 09.01.2023 passed by the learned Single Bench in WP(C) No.76/2023] dismissing the writ petition preferred by the writ petitioners with the prayer to direct the respondent Department to continue them as Directors of the Fakiragram Samabai Page No.# 5/6 Samiti Limited for a period of 5(five) years from 2023 onwards on the basis of their election held in the year 2018.

¶2Learned counsel Mr. M.U. Mahmud representing the appellants/ petitioners vehemently and fervently urged that though appellants/petitioners were elected as Directors of the Fakiragram Samabai Samiti Ltd. in the year 2018 but on account of interim order dated 03.05.2018 passed by this Court in WP(C) No.2429/2018, they could not perform their functions as the Directors.

¶3Thus, as per Mr. Mahmud, the appellants/petitioners deserve to be continued as Directors of the Fakiragram Samabai Samiti Ltd. so as to enable them to complete the tenure of 5 years for which they were elected.

¶4We have considered the submissions of Mr. Mahmud, learned counsel for the appellants and also have gone through the impugned order and the materials placed on record.

¶5It is not in dispute that the appellants herein were elected as Directors in March 2018 and their tenure has come to an end in March, 2023 on completion of 5 years. No person who secures a position in a democratic process by virtue of an election can claim to continue on a post beyond the prescribed tenure unless the statute permits such extension.

¶6The appellants' grievance is that they were not allowed to function as Directors in the Society because the erstwhile members of the Society continued to hold on to the posts by virtue of an interim order passed in earlier round of litigation.

¶7The simple answer to this submission of the appellants' counsel is that the appellants could have challenged the said interim order by approaching the appropriate forum.

¶8Be that as it may, since five years tenure of the appellants pursuant to their election held in 2018 as Directors of the Society has come to an end, they cannot seek Page No.# 6/6 any direction to continue any further.

¶9The impugned order dated 09.01.2023 passed by the learned Single Bench in WP(C) No.76/2023 whereby, the appellants/petitioners were denied such relief does not suffer from any infirmity whatsoever.

¶10Hence, the writ appeal fails and is dismissed as being devoid of merit. No order as to costs.

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant