In a major development the Arbitrator appointed by the Central Register on the complaints of Ashok Dabas in the matter of malpractices in NCUI elections, has quashed the election of Chandra Pal Singh Yadav as the President of National Cooperative Union of India.
Yadav, the President of NCUI suffered a major setback last week as the sole arbitrator Sanjay Agnihotri declared his election illegal which was secured by indulging into malpractices. The Award listed a number of malpractices that were resorted to in the election process.
In his Award (a copy of which is with Indian Cooperative) the Arbitrator observes “The overwhelming evidence on record unequivocally proves that the Respondent No.9(Returning Officer V P Singh) has mis-conducted himself as a Returning Officer and consequently keeping in mind the grave irregularities committed by him the entire selection of the governing council of Respondent No.1(NCUI) held on 16.03.2015 is liable to be set aside and quashed.”
The entire board of Governing Council was saved by a whisker as they were not made party by the complainant. This was said in no uncertain terms by the Arbitrator who observed “ However, in absence of the other elected members of the Governing Council being made a party to the present proceedings, I set aside the election of Respondent No.3 (Gurupratap Khushalpur) to the Governing Council of Respondent No.1(NCUI) . I also set aside the election of Respondent No.2 ( Chandra Pal Singh Yadav) as President of Respondent No.1(NCUI) for reasons discussed in this Award.
“I however, do not grant the relied of setting aside the entire election dated 16.3.2015 of Governing Council of the Respondent No.1, in view of the reasons given in the Award. I hold that Respondents No.4 to 8 were ineligible to be enrolled as delegates of Respondents No.1 under constituency mentioned under bye-law No.14 (a)(v)” it read.
The Award also trashed the list of cases presented by the Advocate of NCUI supporting its stand in the matter. These included Jesus and Mary College, Delhi Vs. University Of Delhi and another 137 (2007) DLT18 (DB), Mathai M. Paikeday Vs C.K.Antony (2011) 13 SCC 174, Avtar Singh Hit Vs. DSGMC and others (2006) 8 SCC 487, etc. There is no relevance of these judgments in the facts of the present case, it ruled.
“From the discussion herein above and the material in record, it is proven beyond a shadow of doubt that the Respondent No.9 has acted in a manner, which keeping in mind his long association with Respondent No.2 was for the benefit of Respondent No.2”, the Award went on.
On the cost of litigation also NCUI suffered as the Judge observed “Costs of the present arbitration are also granted in favor of the Claimants and against the Respondent No.1,2,3, and 9 jointly and severally. The costs payable to the claimants are assessed at Rs 1,50,000/- being Rs 1,10,000/- paid by claimants to the tribunal and Rs 40,000/- toward legal fee.”
