03 December 2018 Administrative Law >> Constitution & Law Procedure  

A recent court judgment has shed light on the proper course of action when contesting decisions made by government officials and tribunals. The case involved a dispute over the leadership of a society.

Background:

The Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies (Joint Registrar) superseded the Committee of a society (referred to as the 2nd appellant). The 2nd appellant appealed this decision to the Co-operative Tribunal, a specialized court handling such matters. The Tribunal issued a temporary order (interlocutory order) putting the Joint Registrar's decision on hold. Instead of contesting the Tribunal's interlocutory order through the appeal process, the Joint Registrar took an unusual step. They filed a writ petition, a legal tool typically used to challenge actions of government officials.

Court's Disapproval:

The Court found fault with the Joint Registrar's approach. They highlighted that proper legal channels exist for contesting decisions made by tribunals. Filing a writ petition in this case was deemed inappropriate.

Beyond the Legal Misstep:

The Court went a step further, expressing strong disapproval of the Joint Registrar's allegation that the Tribunal was somehow "managed" by the 2nd appellant. The Court emphasized the importance of maintaining the integrity of judicial and quasi-judicial bodies like tribunals.

Conclusion:

The Court directed the Tribunal to hear and decide the appeal filed by the 2nd appellant within a specific timeframe. Additionally, the Court ordered the Tribunal to make temporary arrangements for managing the society's affairs while the appeal is ongoing. This case serves as a reminder of the importance of following proper legal procedures. When contesting decisions made by tribunals, the designated appeal process should be followed. The judgment also underscores the need to uphold the integrity of judicial and quasi-judicial bodies.