Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199, 9(6), 12(2)

Summary The petitioner cooperative society challenged the appointment of an Administrator by the respondents, arguing that instead of appointing an Election Officer as required under the Sindh Cooperative Societies Act, 2020 and Rules, 2020, the authorities unlawfully superseded the elected body without establishing any default, mismanagement, or emergency. The respondents proposed resolving the dispute by appointing an independent Election Officer to conduct elections. The High Court held that the appointment of the Administrator was not legally sustainable and, with the consent of both parties, appointed Justice (R) Nadeem Azhar Siddiqui as Commissioner/Election Officer to conduct free and fair elections within two months in accordance with the law. Sections Used Relief Sought Facts of the Case Petitioner's Arguments Respondents' Arguments Court's Analysis Final Order Sections / Articles Used 199, 9(6), 12(2) Two-Word Description Society Elections Administrator Appointment       ORDER SHEET The petitioner Shamshad Cooperative Agricultural Marketing & Credit Society Limited, through its Chairman, has filed this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973 seeking the following relief:- “To declare that despite the repeated requests to appoint observer/election officer under Rule 9(6) or under Section 12(2) to observe the Annual General Body meeting is passing impugned order dated 20.09.2024 referring to another impugned order 09.01.2024 for appointment of administrator is illegal, unlawful, void ab initio and of no legal effect. To declare that no cause accrued with the respondents to appoint administrator of the society vide impugned order dated 20.09.2024 and 09.01.2024 is illegal and unlawful and contrary to the spirit of Act 2020. To suspend the operation of impugned order dated 20.09.2024 and 09.01.2024 as void ab initio.” Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the instant petition has been filed on account of unlawful, arbitrary, and excessive exercise of powers by the official respondents, who, instead of appointing an Election Officer as mandatorily required…