KAILASH CHAND PACHAURI v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
WRIC/36010/2025 · 2025-10-28
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 172548 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 172548 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 36010 of 2025 Court No. - 39 HON'BLE ARINDAM SINHA, J.
HON'BLE SATYA VEER SINGH, J.
1. Mr. H.R. Mishra, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, his client and others have not been given possession of the units since long years. As such there should be inquiry in the affairs of respondent no.4 (the Society), to be made by respondent no.2 (the Housing Commissioner). On query he submits, section 65 in U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 provides for inquiry.
2. On the writ petition having been moved earlier, we had made order dated 15th October, 2025. Paragraph 3 of the said order is reproduced below.
"3. Petitioner has not disclosed requisition duly made under clause (b) in sub section (2) of section 65. However, under sub-section (1) the Registrar may, of his own accord make an inquiry. Petitioner has disclosed information in the writ petition. It is to be considered by the Registrar and instructions issued, for adjudication and disposal on adjourned date."
3. Mr. Raj Mohan Upadhyay, learned advocate, Additional Chief Standing Counsel appears on behalf of State. Mr. Ravi Anand Agarwal appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 2 and 3 hands up instructions in writing dated 27th October, 2025. He submits, the Registrar will make inquiry under section 65. Furthermore, committee of two members has been constituted. Report on inquiry is to be made within two months from date.
4. Mr. Mishra prays for direction for inquiry to be made by the Housing Commissioner. We see, the Registrar has proceeded in terms of provision in the Act. Petitioner wanting the inquiry, on information disclosed, it has been taken cognizance of by the Registrar and inquiry is to be made in accordance with law. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Abhishek Misra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Ravi Anand Agarwal Kailash Chand Pachauri .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s)
5. On record of above, the writ petition is disposed of. Needless to mention, discovery on inquiry will be followed by consequences as per the Act.
(Arindam Sinha,J.)
(Satya Veer Singh,J.) October 29, 2025 Salim WRIC No. 36010 of 2025 2
Digitally signed by :- SALIM PRAVEJ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad