IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.14822 of 2025 Date of Decision: 09.12.2025 _______________________________________________________ The Himalyan Forest Producers Cooperative Society Limited …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & another … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Peeyush Verma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Anuj Bali, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate Generals with Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocate Generals, for the respondent- State. Mr. Sunil Mohan Goel, Senior Advocate with Mr. Abhinav Mohan Goel and Mr. Abhijeet Singh Chauhan, Advocates, for the applicant/proposed respondent. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following main relief:- “ The order dated 01.09.2025, Annexure P-1, whereby the respondent No.1 ordered vacation of the interim stay dated 23.08.2025, may kindly be quashed and set aside and the order dated 23.08.2025, may kindly be quashed 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 and set aside and the order dated 23.08.2025 granting interim stay ordered to be restored.” 2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material adduced on record, this Court finds that order dated 01.09.2025, which is under challenge in the instant proceedings, has been passed by the Secretary (Co-operation) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, who is otherwise complainant in the case at hand. If it is so, there was otherwise no occasion, if any, for afore authority to hear the appeal and pass the impugned order. 3. Pleadings adduced on record by the respective parties reveal that Sh. C. Paulrasu, IAS, had lodged a complaint against Sh. Pawan Chauhan as well as some other persons for their alleged misbehaviour. Pursuant to afore complaint, Registrar Co-operative Societies, Himachal Pradesh, served a show cause notice under Section 37 of the HP Cooperative Societies Act, 1968 (Annexure P- 20) upon Sh. Pawan Chauhan, who happens to be a member of the petitioner society. Interestingly, afore show cause notice, which was entirely based upon the complaint made by Sh. C. Paulrasu, subsequently came to be adjudicated by afore authority in the proceedings initiated at the behest petitioner-society against the order passed by Registrar Co-operative Societies dated 22.04.2025, thereby terminating Sh. Pawan Kumar from directorship of the respondent-Bank. 3 4. At first instance, the above named Officer, while discharging duties as Secretary (Co-operation) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, stayed the operation of order dated 22.04.2025 passed by Registrar Cooperative societies, but subsequently, vide order dated 01.09.2025, which is laid challenge in the instant proceedings, vacated that order. In the aforesaid background, petitioner-society has approached this Court in the instant proceedings. 5. Since it is quite apparent from the facts noted hereinabove, which are not in dispute that Sh. C. Paulrasu has become a judge of his own cause, orders dated 23.08.2025 and 01.09.2025 are not sustainable in the eye of law and as such, deserve to be quashed and set aside. Aforesaid facts as well as position of law have been not disputed by learned counsel representing the parties. They fairy state that in view of the facts, as noticed hereinabove, prayer made in the instant proceedings for setting aside the orders dated 23.08.2025 and 01.09.2025 deserves to be allowed. 6. Consequently, in view of the above, the present petition is allowed and impugned orders dated 23.08.2025 and 01.09.2025 are quashed and set-aside. Since petitioner-society cannot be left remediless, appeal having been filed by the society against the order 4 dated 22.04.2025, can be decided by some other Officer equal to the rank of Secretary (Cooperation). 7. The Chief Secretary, Government of Himachal Pradesh is directed to assign the appeal filed by the petitioner-Society to some other Officer equal to the rank of Secretary (Cooperation) within two days, who in turn, would make all out efforts to decide the appeal expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful in terms of instant order shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass appropriate orders. In the aforesaid terms, the present petition stands disposed of alongwith all the pending applications. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge December 09,2025 (shankar)