Back
2010 Supreme(AP) 291
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN
The Didugu Sand and Boat Workers Co-operative Societies Ltd.
Versus
Divisional Cooperative Officer, Guntur Division, Guntur Others
WRIT PETITION No. 3108 of 2008, WRIT PETITION No. 26039 of 2009, WRIT PETITION No. 2531 of 2010 & WRIT PETITION No. 3452 of 2010
Date of Judgment : 13-04-2010
For the Petitioner:Kanaka Medala Ravindra Kumar, K. Devender, N. Sreedhar Reddy, Advocates. For the Respondents: R1 & R2 - G.P. for Cooperation, R3
- Sri Ramesh Sagar, Advoctae.
Headnote:A) A.P. CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1964, Sections 6 (4) and 15-A - A.P. Cooperative Societies Rules, Rule 3:- Registration of a society in an area does not preclude registration of a similar society in that area – The Registrar of Co-operative societies is not vested with a power to refuse to register a new society on that ground.
B) A.P. CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1964, Sections 3 (1) and (2) and 4 A.P. CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1964, Sections 3 (1) and (2) and 4:_
Circulars issued by the Commissioner of co-operative societies under Section 3 (2) of the Act framing guidelines for the functioning of registering authorities confined to regulation of societies already registered , but not to prevent registration of new societies. – An administrative guidelines directing the Registrars to prevent mushrooming of societies with same objectives does not empower them to register a new society on the ground that exist already a society with the same objective area. – Cannot be used to bestow such a power on the Registrars.
C) ADMINISTRATIVE LAW:- An administrative authority invested with a power under a Statue can exercise it only within the parameters of the statue, but can not go beyond and when their actions are challenged, it should trace such power within the Act, but not beyond.
D) A.P. CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1964, Section 6 - Registrar of co-operative society cannot invoke the guidelines of Commissioner of C-operative Societies to empower himself with the authority to register a society in an area where already there is a society registered with the same objectives and purpose.
E) A.P. MINOR AND MINERAL CONCESSION RULES, 1966, Rules 9-B (1), 9-B (4), 9-C and 9-C (1) – The main reason for the controversy in question is the rule in A.P. Minor and Mineral Concession Rules, Rules 9-B and 9-C which enjoin a 10 % concession in the license fees for boatsmen co-operative societies registered which resulted in the mushrooming growth of co-operative societies of sand quarrying boatsmen in Krishna and Godavari deltas.
F) A.P. CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1964, Section 6 (4) – Provisions of Section 6(4) empowering the Registrar to refuse registration of a society where there is already a society on the ground that it adversely affect the co-operative does not imply an automatic implication of a bar on new registration in the areas where there is already a society. – The Registrar should make a comprehensive enquiry into the facts and pass a reasoned order coming to such conclusion which can be challenged in the Co-operative tribunal.
G) A.P. CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1964, Section 15-A (1) - A.P. Minor and Mineral Concession Rules, 1966, Rule 9 (c) (1) – Provisions of Section 15-A (1) applies only to co-operative societies which are receiving a Government subsidy under Section 42 of the Act – Admittedly the 10% concession given to registered co-operative societies is not a subsidy – Nor is the presumption that new registrations will lead to bifurcation of functional area is a valid ground – In any case application of Section 15 A (1) presuppose a notification being issued calling for objections from the existing co-operaive societies – Hence this section does not empower any monopoly to existing societies and empower the Registrars to refuse registration of new societies.
H) A.P. CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1964, Section 6:- Principles of natural justice cannot be imported into this section requiring the Registrar to issue a notice to existing societies in the area before registering new society because registration of a society does not entail vesting of any civil rights which might be said to be affected in case of registration of new societies in the area.
1. Heard Sri E. Manohar, Learned Senior Counsel, Sri K. Ravindra Kumar and Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, Learned Counsel for the petitioners and the Learned Government Pleader for Co-operation, Sri C.Ramesh Sagar, Sri A. Sanjeev Kumar and Smt. B. Vijaya Lakshmi, Learned Counsel for the respondents and others. At their request all these writ petitions are being finally disposed of.
2. At the outset, it is necessary to briefly note the facts in each of these writ petitions.
3. The area of operations of the petitioner, a co-operative society registered on 08.06.2001, covers the entire Amaravathi Mandal. There exists another society in the said area, called the Dharanikota Sand and Ferry Boat Workers Co-operative Societies Limited, which was registered on 13.10.1976. Sri Marella Koteswara Rao submitted an application to the 1st respondent on 06.12.2007 requesting him to register a new society in the name of “Isuka Mariyu Boat Panivarala Sangham”. The 1st respondent, however, refused to register the society on the ground that there were already two similar societies in existence. Sri M. Koteswara Rao and others were asked, by proceedings dated 12.12.2007, to join either of the two existing societies. A copy of the said letter was addressed to both the petitioner and the Dharanikota society advising them to admit the new members as per their bye-laws.
4. The Deputy Registrar received a representation from V.Sambasiva Rao on 29.01.2008 requesting him to register their society as they had applied for registration as early as on 28.01.2005. The petitioner submitted a representation on 11.02.2008 requesting the 1st respondent not to register the society within their area of operations. Apprehending that the 1st respondent would register the society without notice to them, and once a new society was registered their area of operations would be bifurcated, the petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court.
5. In his counter affidavit, the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies would submit that there is no restriction on new societies being registered within the same area of operations of an existing society; the purpose is to help the poor earn their livelihood; and any number of societies can be formed and registered as long as they fulfill the legal requirements.
b). W.P. No.26039 of 2009:
6. Sri N. Sivaiah, along with fourteen others, submitted an application to the respondents seeking registration of a new society in the name of “Sri Rama Backward Classes (B.C.) Sand & Boat Workers Co-operative Society”. Their application was rejected on the ground that this Court, in W.P.M.P. No.4054 of 2008 in W.P. No.3108 of 2008 dated 15.02.2008, had passed an interim order.
7. The area of operations of the petitioner, a society registered under the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act, (hereinafter called the “Act”), is Tullur Mandal, Guntur District. It is their case that, as they are the only registered Cooperative Society in Tullur Mandal, they are entitled to get the benefit of 10% concession on the knocked down amount in the auction held for quarrying of sand in the sand reaches; respondents 4 and 5, in order to deprive them of such benefits, had filed an application to the 2nd respondent, (Divisional Cooperative Officer, Guntur), seeking registration of their society; and that the 2nd respondent did not put the petitioner on notice.
8. The 2nd respondent informed the promoters of the proposed society that they could seek admission in the existing society. As the promoters contended that the scope and nature of the work in the prospective society was vast, and was in conflict with the interests of the existing society, the 2nd respondent took steps to assess the feasibility of registering the proposed society.
9. In his counter-affidavit, the Additional Registrar of Co-operative Societies would submit that there is no requirement for issuing a notice to the existing society under the Act or the Rules; economic viability of t
