IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 9484 of 2025 Decided on 06th June 2025 Rakesh Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Dr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Pushpinder Singh Jaswal, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate, for respondent No.4. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) Issue notice. Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate, accept notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 and respondent No.4, respectively. 2. By way of this writ petitioner, the petitioner has, inter alia, assailed notice dated 30.04.2025, issued by respondent No.4 for convening of a general house of the 2 Society on 08.06.2025. 3. Dr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner primarily argued that the impugned notice was per se bad for the reason that as the last AGM was convened in the month of 3rd September, 2023, the society had no authority in law to convene any meeting by bypassing the provisions of Section 32 of the Cooperative Societies Act, more so, the proviso thereto. 4. On the asking of the Court Mr. Rajiv Rai, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 sought instructions from his client as to whether any permission was sought from the statutory authority by the society to convene the annual general meeting or not. 5. In terms of the instructions imparted to Mr. Rajiv Rai, learned counsel, on the strength of communication dated 02.05.2025 addressed by the office of Assistant Registrar Cooperative Societies Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, H.P., to respondent No.4, he apprises the Court that necessary permission was taken from the statutory authority by the society. 3 6. In the light of this development, Dr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is allowed to withdraw this petition with liberty to the petitioner to assail the permission so granted in accordance with law, if so advised. It is clarified that this Court has not made any observation qua the legality or illegality of the permission granted by the statutory authority. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge June 06, 2025 (Vinod)