Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:20614 Court No. - 8 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3312 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ajay Shanker Respondent :- Joint Commissioner And Joint Registrar (Cooperative), Lko. Division, Lko. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Piyush Asthana Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vinod Kumar Singh Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Devendra Mohan Shukla, learned Addl. Chief Standing counsel for the respondent State and and Shri Vijay Prakash, Advocate appearing under the authority of Shri Vinod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for respondent nos.3 and 5. 2. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the petition is being disposed of finally, at the admission stage. 3. By means of the instant writ petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs : "(I). A writ order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the order dated 4.1.2025( Annexure No.1) of SURCHARGE passed by the Joint Commissioner and Joint Registrar( Cooperative) Lucknow Division Lucknow under Section 68 (2) of U.P. Cooperative Societies ACt, 1965. II). A writ order or direction in the nature of CERTIORARI quashing the enquiry report dated 14.2.2023 ( Annexure No.2) submitted by the Regional Assistant Commissioner and Assistant Registrar Bareilly Division to he Deputy Commissioner and Deputy Registrar Cooperative Lucknow Division on the basis of illegal enquiry made under Section 68(!) of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965. III). A writ order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding the opposite parties No.3,4 and 5 not to recover any amount towards the Surcharge and also not take any adverse/ coercive action against the petitioner on the basis of the impugned order dated 4.1.2025( Annexure No.1) passed by the Joint Commissioner and Joint Registrar (Cooperative) Lucknow Division Lucknow the opposite party no.1 under Section 68 (2) of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965." 4. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the respondent no.1 had earlier issued a notice for imposing surcharge on the petitioner and certain other similarly situated persons. The same came to be challenged by filing preliminary objections before the respondent no.1. Since the preliminary objections were not being considered, accordingly the petitioner and certain other similarly affected persons had initiated Writ -A No.9875 of 2024 (Ram Sajivan Awasthi and four others Vs. Joint Commissioner and Joint Registrar, Cooperative Society, Lucknow) wherein a Co- ordinate Bench of this Court by means of the order dated 24.10.2024 had disposed of writ petition with a direction to the respondent no.1 to first decide the pending objections. 5. It is the case of the petitioner that even without considering the preliminary objections, yet the order of surcharge dated 4.1.2025 was passed, as a result one of the affected parties namely Ram Gopal Rastogi once again sought the intervention of this court by filing Writ -C No.2027 of 2025 ( Ram Gopal Rastogi Vs. Joint Commissioner and Joint Registrar( Cooperative). The said writ petition came to be allowed by means of the order dated 5.3.2025 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court wherein the order dated 4.1.2025 was quashed with liberty to pass fresh orders only after first deciding the preliminary objections of the petitioner. 6. it is urged that the petitioner who is also aggrieved by the same order dated 4.1.2025, which has already been set aside by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in Writ -C No.2027 of 2025, the same liberty and indulgence be also extended to the petitioner. It is further submitted that even though the order dated 4.1.2025 has been set aside as a whole but since in the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench dated 5.3.2025 it was confined to the petitioner of the said petition and it is apprehended that the petitioner may not be granted the same liberty, and thus the petitioner had to approach this Court. 7. The court had required the learned Additional Chief Standing to seek instructions in the matter. 8. Today, Shri Devendra Mohan Shukla, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel has provided a copy of the written instructions under the signatures of the respondent no.1 dated 8.4.2025 for perusal and the same is taken on record. 9. The stand of the respondent State is that once the order dated 4.1.2025 has been set aside and there are 12 similarly affected persons including the petitioner, hence it is in the fitness of things that not only the benefit extended to Ram Gopal Rastogi who had approached this Court, but notices have been issued to all the other similarly affected persons including the petitioner on 14.3.2025. 10. Considering the aforesaid and noticing that petitioner has been issued notice to make his submissions, this Court is of the opinion that no gainful purpose would be served in keeping the petition pending and since the stand of the State is clear, accordingly, this petition is disposed of with direction that the petitioner shall be entitled to raise objections/ which are available on the record of respondent no.1, who shall hear the petitioner as well and only after deciding the preliminary objections, may proceed in accordance with law as indicated in the order dated 5.3.2025 passed in Writ -C No.2027of 2025. 11. With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of. Order Date :- 11.4.2025 Shukla Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench