SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(AP) 191

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : T.N.C.RANGA RAJAN
Badugu Giribabu - Appellant
Versus
The District Collector, Guntur - Respondent
Decided On : 03-12-96

The main legal point established in the judgment is that the examination of applications for membership and the finding of their falsity justified the issuance of a fresh election notification. Additionally, the court clarified the interpretation of Section 19 (2-A) and Section 19 (3) of the A. P. Co-operative Societies Act.

Headnote:

Membership - Co-operative Society - The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the election notification for a society on the ground that the petitioners' claim for membership had not been considered. The court found that the petitioners' applications for membership had been examined and found to be false, and therefore, a fresh election notification was issued. The court also held that the petitioners' alternate argument, based on Section 19 (2-A) of the A. P. Co-operative Societies Act, was untenable as the applications were not unreasonably refused by the Cooperative society and had not been rejected in the first instance under Section 19 (3) of the Act.

Fact of the Case:

The writ petition challenged the notification for election for a society on the ground that the petitioners' claim for membership of the society had not been considered.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioners' applications for membership had been examined and found to be false, and therefore, a fresh election notification was issued. The court also dismissed the petitioners' alternate argument based on Section 19 (2-A) of the A. P. Co-operative Societies Act.

Issues: The issues involved the consideration of the petitioners' claim for membership, the examination of their applications for membership, and the interpretation of Section 19 (2-A) and Section 19 (3) of the A. P. Co-operative Societies Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioners' applications for membership had been examined and found to be false, and therefore, a fresh election notification was issued. The court also held that the petitioners' alternate argument based on Section 19 (2-A) of the A. P. Co-operative Societies Act was untenable as the applications were not unreasonably refused by the Cooperative society and had not been rejected in the first instance under Section 19 (3) of the Act.

Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed by the court.

T. N. C. RANGA RAJAN, J.

( 1 ) THIS Writ Petition challenges the notification for election for the 2nd respondent-society on the ground that the petitioners claim for membership of the society has not been considered. Earlier the petitioners complained before this Court that their applications for membership have not been accepted. This court by an order dated 17-7-95 passed the following order:-"the Divisional Co-operative Officer, Guntur Division is directed to examine the claims of these petitioners and 300 others in the background of the specific allegation that they were denied membership on 2-7-1995 and 4-7-1995 whereas some of the supporters of the ruling party were given admission on or before 6-7-95 by the second respondent. The divisional Co-operative Officer is also directed to examine the membership Registers with reference to forms of those who have been made members to the Society up to 6-7-95. On verification if the Divisional co-operative Officer is satisfied that the voters list issued by the committee or the authorised officer in this behalf to the Election Officer is correct and the allegations made by the petitioners are false, could sent a detailed report to the first respondent District Collector who is the competent authority for issuing of a fresh election notification in this behalf. Since the process of elections will commence from 18-7-95, having regard to the above discussion, the said election process cannot be proceed with. "the case of the petitioners is that without complying with this direction, a fresh election notification has been issued on 27-2-96 for holding elections on 4-3-96. Learned Government Pleader for Co-operation produced the enquiry report dated 6-2-96 according to which the allegations of the petitioners that they were prevented from giving applications for membership were found to be false. It follows that the directions given by this Court in the above order was fully carried out and in view of the finding that the allegations of the petitioners were false, a fresh election notification was required to be issued and has also been issued.

( 2 ) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioners made alternate argument that the petitioners had given fresh applications not only to the Enquiry Officer but also to the District Co-operative Officer on 5-10-95 and until those applications are disposed of fresh election cannot be held ignoring the right of the petitioners to participate in the election. The learned Counsel for the petitioners referred to section 19 (2-A) of the A. P. Co-operative Societies Act, hereinafter called the act , and submits that once applications were given, they are deemed to be members and ignoring them from the election process was untenable.

( 3 ) LEARNED Government Pleader for Co-operation denies receipt of any applications and also stated that under Section 19 (2) (A) of the Act considering the petitioners as deemed to have become members will not arise unless the applications have been made first to the society and rejected under Section 19 (3) of the Act. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners was not able to produce any acknowledgment for having sent the applications on 5-10-1995 though it is stated that the required amount was sent by draft which has been encashed. Even assuming that the applications were sent under Section 19 (2) (A) of the Act directly to the District Co-operative Officer, I am of the opinion that the contention of the learned Government Pleader for Co-operation is correct though Section 19 (2) (A) of the Act merely states that any person duly qualified for admission may make an application it is obvious that this remedy should not be resorted to unless it has been unreasonably refused by the Cooperative society under Section 19 (3) of the Act. Otherwise it will mean that the society is by-passed and applications are made directly to the Registrar and the persons are deemed to be members without giving opportunity to the Co-operative society t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top