IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.8713 of 2025 Decided on: 07.05.2026 _________________________________________________________________ Satya Devi ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Mukul Sood, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajat Chaudhary, Assistant Advocate General for respondents No. 1 to 4. Mr. Surinder K Saklani, Advocate, for respondent No.5. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the case file. 2. It appears that an order was passed by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Bilaspur, H.P. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes - 2 - under Section 72 of the Himachal Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1968 (the Act in short) on 04.01.2013. Petitioner’s husband Sh. Mehar Chand S/o Sh. Mangat Ram, R/o Village Jangle Jheledia, P.O. Kandraur, Tehsil Sadar, District Shimla was a party respondent therein. Feeling aggrieved against the aforesaid order, present respondent No.5 filed an appeal under Section 93 of the Act before the Joint Registrar (Credit) Cooperative Societies, Directorate of Cooperation Himachal Pradesh, Shimla. The said appeal was taken up for hearing and vide order dated 09.11.2016, the same was allowed. Impugned order dated 04.01.2013 passed by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Bilaspur was quashed and set aside. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at the time of decision of the appeal, petitioner’s husband, who was impleaded as respondent No.10 therein, had left for his heavenly abode; Petitioner’s husband passed away on 06.01.2014. His death certificate has been placed on record at Annexure P-2. Petitioner seeks setting aside of the appellate order dated 09.11.2016 on the ground of same having been passed against a dead person and rights of - 3 - petitioner (legal heir of deceased respondent No.10) having been adversely affected as a consequence thereof. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents do not dispute the above factual position. 5. In view of order dated 09.11.2016 having been passed by the Appellate Authority against a dead person, the same is therefore, set aside. Matter is remanded to respondent No.3 with direction to hear the appeal afresh in accordance with law. Parties through their learned counsel are directed to appear respondent No.3 on 02.06.2026. Respondent No.5 to take requisite steps in accordance with law for formally impleading petitioner as party respondent in the appeal. The writ petition to stand disposed of in the above terms, so also pending application(s) if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge May 07, 2026 R.Atal