A serious objection is taken on I.A. No.19566/2026 , an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC read with Section 151 of CPC for impleading complainant as a party to the proceedings. Objection is taken to the effect that the application is said to be served upon to the counsel Shri Arpit Singh on 14/08/2026.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Shri Arpit Singh is practicing at Indore and on 14/08/2026, he was not available at Jabalpur, therefore forged signature was made on the application showing the receipt of application by Shri Arpit Singh, Advocate.
However, the said argument is denied by learned counsel for the proposed intervenor on the ground that he has actually served the application to Shri Arpit Singh, Advocate.
Let both the counsel to file affidavits in support of their arguments to satisfy the Court regarding the same within a period of seven days from 2 WP-32085-2026 today.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that on earlier complaint made by the proposed intervenor and others, the enquiry was conducted and the enquiry report was submitted on 06/11/2025. The enquiry report exonerates the petitioner regarding all the allegations and proposed for closure of the complaint. It is also pointed out that the proposed intervenor is one of the complainants in the matter and they have not appeared in the enquiry. He has drawn attention of this Court to page No.38 of document Annexure-P/7, wherein it is pointed out that the complainant Shri Vijay Kumar Khandelwal, who was the previous President of the Society, has not appeared in the proceedings, rather his grandson appeared in the matter, however at the time of final conclusion, neither Shri Vijay Kumar Khandelwal nor his grandson appeared in the matter before the Authorities. Thereafter again a fresh application has been filed by Shri Vijay Kumar Khandelwal to the concerning Minister of the Department, on the basis of which, letters have been issued on 29/05/2026 and thereafter an order dated 01/06/2026 has been passed by the Joint Commissioner, Cooperative Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal. The said letter reflects that the matter has been taken up for further enquiry and during the pendency of enquiry, all new allotments, impleadment of new members, operations of accounts is put on hold till the enquiry is completed in the matter.
It is argued that the petitioner has been exonerated in earlier enquiry report, despite of the same, fresh enquiry has been initiated and everything is put at hold. Until and unless, petitioner is declared guilty in the said enquiry, 3 WP-32085-2026 how the Authorities could have passed such an order.
Learned State counsel was directed to explain passing of order impugned (Annexure-P/2) as well as initiation of subsequent enquiry on the pretext of second application filed by the complainant.
He prays for short time to enable him to seek instructions or to file reply in the matter.
However, the fact remains that in the earlier enquiry, petitioner was exonerated on 06/11/2025. The question arises that how the second enquiry could have been initiated without assailing the enquiry report dated 06/11/2025.
Learned counsel appearing for the proposed intervenor was asked that whether such enquiry report was assailed by the complainant before any forum. He fairly submits that the enquiry report dated 06/11/2025 has not been assailed by the complainant anywhere.
Under these circumstances, the Authorities could not have passed an order impugned dated 01/06/2026 (Annexure-P/2). However, as this Court has granted time to the petitioner's counsel and counsel appearing for the proposed intervenor to file their affidavits with respect to I.A. No.19566/2026 as well as the fact that State counsel could not explain passing of the order dated 01/06/2026 in view of earlier enquiry report dated 06/11/2025 (Annexure-P/7), the effect and operation of orders impugned dated 29/05/2026 and 01/06/2026 (Annexure-P/1 and P/2) to remain stayed till the next date of hearing.
Learned State counsel prays for and is granted two weeks' time to 4 WP-32085-2026 enable him to file response to the petition.
Meanwhile, affidavits with respect to I.A. No.19566/2026 be also filed by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as proposed intervenor.
List the matter after two weeks.
