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

1984 Supreme(AP) 174

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : A.LAKSHMANA RAO, A.RAGHUVIR
Government of A.P., REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, CO-OPERATIVE DEPT., SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD - Appellant
Versus
K.SETHURAMMAN, MEMBER PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., MOPARRU VILLAGE, NARSAPUR TALUK, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT - Respondent
Decided On : 04-23-84

A person or persons appointed by the Registrar to manage the affairs of a society under Section 32 (7) (a) of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964, is a Committee within the meaning of Section 21-C of the Act.

Headnote:

CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES - COMMITTEE - MEANING - PERSON OR PERSONS APPOINTED BY REGISTRAR TO MANAGE AFFAIRS OF SOCIETY UNDER SECTION 32 (7) (A) OF ANDHRA PRADESH CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1964 - WHETHER COMMITTEE WITHIN MEANING OF SECTION 21-C - YES.

Fact of the Case:

The issue before the court was whether a person or persons appointed by the Registrar to manage the affairs of a society under Section 32 (7) (a) of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964, is a Committee within the meaning of Section 21-C of the Act.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the person or persons appointed by the Registrar to manage the affairs of the society under Section 32 (7) (a) of the Act come within the definition of the word "committee" and as such fall within the meaning of the word "committee" under Section 21-C of the Act.

Issues: Whether a person or persons appointed by the Registrar to manage the affairs of a society under Section 32 (7) (a) of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964, is a Committee within the meaning of Section 21-C of the Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the definition of the word "committee" in Section 2 (b) of the Act and held that the words "by whatever name called" occurring in the definition refer to the governing body, namely, the committee but not the society. The court also held that the person or persons appointed by the Registrar to manage the affairs of the society under Section 32 (7) (a) have to manage the affairs of the society and as such come within the definition of the word "committee".

Final Decision: The court allowed the Writ Appeal and set aside the judgment of the learned single Judge under appeal.

LAKSHMANA RAO, J.

( 1 ) IN this Writ Appeal there is no dispute about facts. The only question that arises for consideration is whether a person or persons appointed by the Registrar to manage the affairs of the Society in exercise of the powers conferred upon him under Section 32 (7) (a) of the Andhra pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 7 of 1964, hereinafter referred to as the act , is a Committee within the meaning of Section 21-C. A Full Bench of this Court in Kamareddy Suryanarayana vs. District Co-operative Officer while interpreting the word committee" in Section 21-C held as follows: ". . . . . . . . They must have meant it to be both an elected committee and a nominated committee. " the learned Judges have considered the objects and reasons for enacting Section 21-C and uitimately came to the above said conclusion. It is no doubt true that while coming to the said conclusion, the learned judges were concerned with a committee nominated under the second proviso to Section 31 of the Act.

( 2 ) IN the instant case, certain persons were appointed by the registrar under Section 32 (7) (a) to manage the affairs of the Society. It is contended by the learned Government Pleader that there is no difference or distinction between a committee nominated under Section 31 second Proviso, and a person or persons appointed under Section 32 (1) (a) by the Registrar to manage the affairs of the Society. In this connection, the learned Government Pleader has drawn our attention to the definition of the word committee , which reads as follows:". . . . . . committee means the governing body of a Society by whatever name called, to which the management of the affairs of the society is entrusted. "under Section 31, the general body of a society shall constitute a committee in accordance with the bye-laws and entrust the management of the affairs of the society to such committee. The committee constituted by the general body is obviously an elected committee. Under the Second proviso to Section 31, in the case of a Society registered after the commencement of the Act, the persons who have signed the application for registration of the society, are empowered to appoint a committee to conduct the affairs of the society. This society is referred to by the Full bench as a nominated committee. Under Section 32 (7) (a) the Registrar is conferred power to appoint person or persons to manage the affairs of the Society for a particular period. Having regard to the provisions referred to above, it is urged by the learned Government Pleader that whatever may be the nature of the appointment of the Committee, either by nomination as contemplated under the second proviso to Section 31, or bye-laws of the Society or by the Registrar under Section 32 (7) (a), when such a committee or person or persons arc appointed to manage the affairs of the society, they come within the meaning of the word committee by whatever name they may be called. The Full Bench as categorically lard down that there is no difference be ween an elected committee and a nominated committee so far as Section 21-C is concerned. We find force in the contention of the learned Government Pleader that the person or persons in charge appointed by the Registrar to manage the affairs of the society fall within the definition of committee . On the other hand, it is contended by the learned counsel for the respondent that a committee nominated under the second Proviso to Section 31 function independently and is not subject to the control of the Registrar, whereas the person or persons incharge appointed under Section 32 (7) (a) by the Registrar to manage the affairs of the Society have to function subject to the control of the Registrar and as such the person or persons so appointed cannot be said to come within the definition of the word committee . Jayachandra Reddy, J. , while interpreting the word committee , has held that the words by whatever name called" occurring in the defin



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