Back
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : ALLADI KUPPUSWAMI, P.RAMACHANDRA RAJU
Palli Pentayya Naidu - Appellant
Versus
Sirisetti Somaraju - Respondent
Decided On : 07-27-79
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES - ELECTION - POSTPONEMENT OF DATE OF GENERAL BODY MEETING - ELECTION OFFICER - JURISDICTION - CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1964 - RULE 22 (2) (A) - RULE 22 (5) (IV).
Fact of the Case:
The Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, appointed an Election Officer to conduct the election for the Cheedigummala primary Agricultural Co-operative society. The Election Officer issued a notice fixing the date of the General Body meeting for electing the office bearers. Later, the Deputy Registrar modified the order and appointed another Election Officer to continue the election process from the stage at which it was left by the previous Election Officer. The new Election Officer issued a notice postponing the date of the General Body meeting. A member of the Society filed a writ petition challenging the postponement of the election date. The High Court quashed the notice postponing the election date and directed that the election be held according to rules.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court held that the Election Officer had no jurisdiction to postpone the date of the General Body meeting. The Court held that Rule 22 (5) (iv) of the Co-operative Societies Rules, which prohibits the Election Officer from allowing any adjournment of the proceedings except in certain circumstances, applies only to the stage of scrutiny of nomination papers and not to the stage of fixing the date of the General Body meeting. The Court also held that there is no provision in the Rules which enables the Election Officer to postpone the date of the General Body Meeting once it has been fixed under Rule 22 (2) (a).
Issues: Whether the Election Officer had the jurisdiction to postpone the date of the General Body meeting.
Ratio Decidendi: The powers of the Election Officer are strictly limited by the statute and the Rules made thereunder. There is no general right apart from the statute and the rules, in the Election officer in the matter of conduct of elections to co-operative societies.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed.
( 1 ) THE Deputy Registrar, Co- operative Societies, Yellamanchili, who is the fourth respondent in third appeal appointed Sri K. V. Ratnakar Rao to conduct the election for the Cheedigummala primary Agricultural Co- operative society. Sri Ratnakar Rao accordingly issued a noticed fixing the person-in- charge of the Society fixing 22- 6- 1978 as the date of the General Body meeting for electing the office bearers. On 2- 5- 1978, the fourth respondent modified his earlier order and appointed Sri G. Suvarnaraju Raju as the Election officer to conduct the election of the office bearers of the Society. In that order, it was specifically stated that the Election officer should continue the election process from the stage at which it was left by Sri Ratnakar Rao and that he should not initiate the election process if it was not started in respect of the Society. Thereafter, Sri Suvarnaraju; issued a notice on 25- 5-1978 fixing the date of the General body meeting for electing the office bearers as 2706-1978. The respondent herein who is the member of the Society field writ petition No. 2439 of 1978 questioning the action of Sri Suvarnaraju in postponing the date of election from 22- 6-1978 to 17- 6- 1978. He also applied for stay of the election. But, this court by its order dated 16-6-1978 rejected the application, but directed that the result of the election would be subject to the result of writ petition.
( 2 ) OUR learned brother, Gangadhara Rao J. held that the noticed given by the Election officer postponing the date of election from 22-6-1978 to 27-6-1978 was illegal. Hr therefore quashed the noticed given by the Election officer to give an election programme afresh and hold the election according to rules. Meanwhile, in view of dismissal of the stay petition, the election was held on 27- 6- 1978, and the appellant herein was one of the persons who was elected as an office bearer. As, by reason of the order of this court in the stay petition, his election was subject to the result of the writ petition, and as the writ petition was allowed, his election was invalid. The appellant though not a party to the writ petition became aggrieved and preferred his appeal after obtaining the leave of this court. .
( 3 ) IN holding that the notice postponing the date of election was illegal, Justice Gangadhara Rao referred to Rule 22, sub-rule (5), clause (iv) which provides that the Election officer shall not allow any adjournment of the proceedings except when proceedings are interrupted of obstructed by riot or affray or by causes beyond his control. He held that in this case the proceedings were not interrupted or obstructed by riot or affray or by any cause beyond the control of the Election officer. Hence, the Election officer had no jurisdiction to adjourn the proceedings.
( 4 ) SRI Pandurangarao, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that Rule 22- (5) (iv) has no application to the facts of the case. Rules 22 deals with procedure regarding conduct of elections to committees of Societies. Rule 22 (2) deals with election programme and directs the Election officer to fix the place, time and date of general meeting at which the election shall be held and communicate it to the committee, the person or persons appointed under sub-section (7) of section 2, the special officer or the managing committee appointed under sub-section (1) of section34, or a liquidator appointed under sub-section (1) of section 65, as the case may be, who shall forthwith supply such information and make available such records and funds as requisitioned by the election officer. A copy of the decision referred to in cl. (a) of sub-rule (2) to hold the meeting at a particular time and place has to be sent to the Registrar in certain cases and to the Regional Joint Registrar in cases of other societies. There after, the Election officer has to send intimation of the time, date and place of the genera meeting to each of the member societ
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
