Back
1989 Supreme(AP) 192
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : UPENDRA LAL WAGHRAY, YOGESHWAR DAYAL
Toddy Tapper Co-operative Society - Appellant
Versus
Excise Superintendent, Registrar of Toddy Tappers Co-operative Societies, R.R.Distt, Hyderabad - Respondent
Decided On : 04-13-89
Section 19 (3) of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act contemplates a deemed membership after the expiry of the period of sixty days from the date of the receipt of application for membership.
Headnote:
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT - SECTION 19 (3) - DEEMED MEMBERSHIP - INTERPRETATION - COURT HELD THAT SECTION 19 (3) READ WITH ITS PROVISO DOES CONTEMPLATED A DEEMED MEMBERSHIP AFTER THE EXPIRY OF THE PERIOD OF SIXTY DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THE RECEIPT OF APPLICATION FOR MEMBERSHIP.
Fact of the Case:
A Toddy Tappers Co-operative society filed a writ petition to quash the order of the Registrar directing that the names of four persons be entered as members in the records of the Society, failing which action will be taken under section 34 of the Act. The Society contended that it is for the Managing committee to decide whether the applicants are to be admitted as members or not and that these four persons are not residents of the village and are, therefore, not eligible according to the bye-laws of the society read with Section 19 (1) of the Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that Section 19 (3) read with its proviso does contemplate a deemed membership after the expiry of the period of sixty days from the date of the receipt of application for membership. The court found that the Society had not taken any decision regarding the admission of the four persons within the period specified and that, therefore, they were deemed to have been admitted as members on the date of expiration of such period.
Issues: Whether Section 19 (3) of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act contemplates a deemed membership after the expiry of sixty days of the application.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted Section 19 (3) and its proviso to mean that a Society is obliged to take a decision regarding admission and communicate it within sixty days or otherwise deeming provision will come into operation. The court held that the interpretation by the learned single Judge in the case reported in D. Srinivas Reddy v. Distt. Collector (supra) that Section 19 (3) read with its proviso does not contemplate a deemed membership after the expiry of the period of sixty days from the date of the receipt of application for membership as contemplated by it, is not correct.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed.
( 1 ) AT the stage of consideration of the petition to vacate the interim orders granted by this Court our learned brother M. N. Rao, J. , by his order dated 22-3-1989 has referred the writ petition for consideration by a Bench, as he did not agree with the judgment of another learned single Judge, P. A. Choudary, J. reported in D. Sreenivas Reddy v. Dist. Collector, [1988 (2) APLJ 181] regarding the construction of Section 19 (3) of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter called the Act ). At the hearing of the vacate stay petition before us, with the consent of both the counsel, we have heard them in the main writ petition itself.
( 2 ) THE writ petition has been filed by a Toddy Tappers Co-operative society for quashing the order dated 19-10-1988 of the 1st respondent (concerned Registrar under the Co-operative Societies Act) directing that toe names of the four persons respondents 3 to 6 to be entered as members in the records of the Society, failing which action will be taken under section 34 of the Act viz. , for superseding the Managing Committee of the society. It is not in dispute that they had made an application for being admitted as members of tne Society on 8-7-1988, and even after the expiry of sixty days, no communication in writing was received by the said applicants regarding the fate of their application. They gave a representation to the Kegistrar in tnis behalf on 13-10-1988. The Excise Sub-Inspector having jurisdiction had sent a report according to which these persons are residents of the village and are tappers having passed the tapping test. In these circumstances tne impugned order has been passed.
( 3 ) ACCORDING to in T. Raghunatha Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, it is tor the Managing committee ot the Society to decide whether the applicants are to be admitted as members or not taking into consideration several relevant factors like their eligibility, availaoility ot facilities, that is, numoer ot trees for tapping etc. It is also alleged that these four persons are not residents of the village and are, therefore, not eligible according to the bye-laws of the society read with Section 19 (1) of tne Act. He has placed reliance upon the judgment of the learned single Judge reported in D. Srinivas Reddy v. Distt. Collector, [19s8 (2) APLJ 181] and contended that Section 19 (3) read with its proviso does not provide for a deemed membership after the expiry of sixty days of the application, but only contemplates the communication of a decision taken by the Committee regarding the application for membership. It is contended that the impugned proceeding by which action under Section 34 is threatened is illegal and amounts to interference in the functioning of the Society.
( 4 ) IT is stated in para 2 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that it was decided not to admit the petitioners, as they do not belong to Gowda community and were not residents of the village and tin s was also orally informed to the applicants as well as the 1st respondent. According to the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2, there were twelve existing members of the Society. Seventeen persons submitted their applications on 8-7-1988 for admission, out of whom, the excise Sub-Inspector had after enquiry found that only twelve were eligible for membership bein3 tappers and residents of the village. The Society admitted only eight of these and declined to admit the remaining four viz. , respondents 3 to 6. It is also stated that having regard to the number of trees allotted to the shop for which the Society has been granted a licence, there are sufficient number of trees to accommodate forty-five members in all, while in fact, even after admitting the four respondents, the strength will be only twenty. It is also pointed out that according to the amended bye-laws of the Society it has to admit only tappers who have been approved by the Ex
