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

1983 Supreme(Kar) 77

Karnataka High Court
NADA B.K.V.M.P.CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD - Appellant
Versus
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO -OP.SOCIETIES - Respondent
Decided On : 04-15-83
W.P. : 7182 of 1933

Advocates:
B.VEERABHADRAPPA

The court established that Section 64(1) of the Act did not confer arbitrary powers and provided guidelines, thus not violating Article 14 of the Constitution.

Headnote:

Registrar - Cooperative Society - Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, Section 64

Fact of the Case:

The Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies appointed an inquiry into the affairs of a cooperative society under Section 64 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959. The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of Section 64(1) contending it violated Articles 14, 19, and 245 of the Constitution of India.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that Section 64(1) of the Act was not unconstitutional and dismissed the petition.

Issues: 1. Is Section 64(1) of the Act unconstitutional? 2. Is Annexure-A issued under Section 64(1) bad-in-law?

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that Section 64(1) did not confer arbitrary powers and provided guidelines for initiating an inquiry, communicating the results, and appeal processes. The court cited precedents to support the view that the provision did not violate Article 14 of the Constitution.

Final Decision: The petition was dismissed as the court found no merit in the challenge to Section 64(1) and Annexure-A.

VENKATESH, J.

( 1 ) THE Assistant Registrar of Coperative Societies, Indi Sub-division, indi (respondent-1 herein), acting under S. 64 of the Karnataka Co-perative societies Act, 1959 (the Act), appointed the 2nd Respt, herein to hold an enquiry into the affairs of the Nada B. K. V. M. P. Co-operative Society Ltd. , Indi (hereinafter called the Society ). The 1st petitioner-Society and the 2nd petitioner, who is said to be the Director of the Society, while challenging the said order of the Asst. 'registrar dt. 28-3-1983, (order No. GIMiscjloan: enq 82-83-Annexure-A), have also been questioning the constitutional validity of sub-sec. (1) of S. 64 of the Act contending that that provision is violative of Arts. 14, 19 and 245 of the Constitution of India.

( 2 ) HOWEVER, while seeking Rule, the learned Counsel for the petitioners confined his attack to say that S. 64 (1) of the Act confers unbridled powers on the Registrar and, therefore, was violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution.

( 3 ) S. 64 of the Act reads as follows: "64. Inquiry by Registrar- (1) The registrar may, of his own motion, by himself or by a person authorised by him in writing hold an enquiry into any matter specified in the order touching the constitution, working and financial condition of a Co-operative Society. (2) An inquiry of the nature referred to in sub-sec, (l) shall be held on the application of- (a) Co-operative Society to which the society concerned is affiliated; (b) a majority of the members of the committee of the society; or (c) not less than one-third of total number of members of the society. (3) The Registrar or the persons authorised by him under sub-sec, (l) shall, for the purpose of an inquiry under this sub-section have following powers, namely:-- (a) he shall, at all times, have free access to the books, accounts, documents, securities, cash and other properties belonging to or in the custody of the Society and may summon any person in possession or responsible for the custody of any such books, accounts securities, cash or other properties to produce the same at any public office at the headquarters of the Society or any branch thereof; (b) he may summon any person who, he has reason to believe has knowledge of any of the affairs "of society, to appear before him at public office at the headquarters of the society or any branch thereof and may examine such person on oath; and (c) (i) he may, notwithstanding any rule or bye-law specifying the period of notice for the general meeting of the Society require the officers of the Society to call such a general meeting at such time and place at the headquarters of the Society or any branch thereof and to determine such matters as may be directed by him, and where the officers of the Society refuse to call 'such meeting he shall have power to call it himself; (ii) any meeting called under clause (i) shall have the power of the general meeting called under the bye-laws of the Society and its proceeding shall be regulated by such bye-laws except that no quorum shall be necessary for such meeting. (4) When an inquiry is made under this section the Registrar shall communicate the result of the inquiry to the Society and to the Co-operative Society, if any, to which that society is affiliated". Counsel for the petitioner argues that the power conferred to hold an inquiry into "any matter specified in the order touching the constitution, working, and financial condition. . . . . . " is in very wide terms and is likely to be misused, and since there are no guide' lines in the matter, the auhority can pick and choose the institution of his choice and put that institution into humiliation by making a show of an enquiry. In this connection he drew my attention to S. 65 of the Act under which the Registrar is conferred with powers to inspect books of a Co-operative Society. He submits that the powers conferred herein are more circumscribed and were required to be used in accordance with the guide lines c


















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
whatsapp-icon Back to top