[2025:RJ-JP:27140] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10146/2025 Mahaveer Prasad S/o Shri Tulcha Ram, Aged About 62 Years, R/o Vpo Narodara, Tehsil Laxmangarh, District Sikar, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Cooperative Societies, Government Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 2. The Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 3. The Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Sikar. 4. The Manager, Narodara Gram Seva Sehkari Samiti Limited, Narodara, Laxmangarh, District Sikar. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pradeep Mathur For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manoj Bharadwaj Mr. Arpit Dotasra JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 21/07/2025 1. Aggrieved by the order dated 13.05.2025 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Sikar, the instant writ petition has been preferred before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. At the outset, an objection has been taken by counsel for the respondents on the maintainability of this writ petition. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the aforesaid order is appealable under Section 104 of the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 2001”). Learned counsel submits that, hence, under these circumstances, the writ petition is not maintainable. [2025:RJ-JP:27140] (2 of 2) [CW-10146/2025] 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that prior to passing of the aforesaid order, no opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioner. 4. Perusal of the order dated 13.05.2025 indicates that opportunities were provided, but no reply was submitted by the petitioner and, accordingly, the order impugned was passed. This Court, at this stage, is not going into the controversy as to whether the order impugned was passed after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or not. But in the considered opinion of this Court, this writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has alternative statutory remedy for filing an appeal under Section 104 of the Act of 2001. 5. It is settled proposition of law that whenever alternative statutory remedy of filing an appeal is available to a person, he cannot be allowed to bypass the jurisdiction of the Appellate Authority. 6. On this count alone, the instant writ petition stands disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file statutory appeal under Section 104 of the Act of 2001 before the Appellate Authority. 7. In case, any appeal is submitted by the petitioner before the Appellate Authority within a period of one month from today, the Appellate Authority is expected to hear and decide the same on its merits after affording opportunity of hearing to all the respective parties expeditiously, ignoring the period of limitation. 8. Stay application and all applications (pending, if any) also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/12