Back
1988 Supreme(Kar) 93
Karnataka High Court
B.T.Subbarangayya - Appellant
Versus
Registrar of Co-operative Societies in Karnataka - Respondent
Decided On : 03-09-88
W.P. : 1037 of 1987
A.Hassan, M.N.Hegde, R.L.Ravindra, Y.V.Parthasarathy
The main legal point established in the judgment is the duty of public officials to fulfill statutory requirements, the need for accountability and timely action, and the entitlement of the petitioner to the writ of mandamus due to the inaction of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies.
Headnote:
Mandamus - Reservation in Co-operative Society Election - Sec. 28-A of Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 - Summary of Acts and Sections: Sec. 28-A of Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 - The court discussed the provisions of Sec. 28-A of the Act, which provides for reservation of seats for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and women in the election to the Managing Committee of the society. The court highlighted the duty of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies to approve the amended bye-laws and enforce the reservation provisions. The court emphasized the need for accountability and timely action by public officials in fulfilling statutory requirements.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to implement the provisions of Sec. 28-A of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, providing reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and women in the election to the Managing Committee of the society. The petitioner alleged non-compliance with the statutory requirement and requested the court to intervene.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Registrar of Co-operative Societies had not approved the amended bye-laws, leading to the election delay. The court criticized the inaction of the Registrar and emphasized the need for timely decision-making and accountability. The court held that the petitioner was entitled to the writ of mandamus and directed the Registrar to take immediate action to consider and approve the bye-laws within 30 days.
Issues: The issues involved non-compliance with the reservation provisions of Sec. 28-A of the Act, inaction of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, and the delay in conducting the election to the Managing Committee of the society.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the failure of the Registrar to approve the amended bye-laws, emphasizing the duty of public officials to fulfill statutory requirements and the need for accountability and timely action. The court held that the petitioner was entitled to the writ of mandamus due to the inaction of the Registrar.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition and directed the Registrar of Co-operative Societies to take immediate action to consider and approve the bye-laws within 30 days. The court also ordered the first respondent to pay costs to the petitioner for the failure to discharge the duty imposed by law.
( 1 ) THIS writ petition coming up for orders today, by consent of the Counsel for all the parties, arguments were heard.
( 2 ) THIS is a writ petition filed under article 226 for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing respondents 1 to 3 to give effect to the provisions of Sec. 28-A of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959. providing reservation for the members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and for women in the proposed election to the Managing Committee of the third respondent society.
( 3 ) THE facts of the case, in brief, are as follows : The petitioner is a share- holder of the third respondent-Society and the society consists of Managing committee of 12 members. The State government incorporated Sec. 28-A by an amendment Act called Karnataka Co- operative Societies (Amendment) Act, 1984, into the Act and the same provides for reseivation of seats for the Scheduled- castes, Scheduled Tribes and for women. The second respondent who is the Assistant commissioner of Bangalore District was appointed as a Returning Officer for the purpose of conducting the elections to the Managing Committee of the third respondent-society and a calendar of events was published on 13-12-1986 for holding the elections, According to the calendar of events, the nomination was to be submitted on or before 18-1-1987. Along with the calendar of events, instructions to the shareholders were also published. However, the grievance of the petitioner is that the calendar of events did not disclose or notify any reservation of seats to the members belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled tribes and also for women. The calendar of events is Annexure-A. Thereafter the petitioner and others interested submitted a memorandum to the second respondent informing him that the calendar of events was defective since it did not contain the particulars regarding number of members to be elected to the Managing Committee and also it was silent on the reservation of seats to members belonging to scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and women. The copy of the representation is Annexure-B. It is further stated that the petitioner represented to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, who is the first respondent herein, informing him that he should take action for complying with the requirements of Section 28a of the Cooperative Societies Act and the Registrar did not take any action.
( 4 ) AN endorsement dated 20-1-1987 was issued by the second respondent informing the petitioner that it is not necessary to set out the number of members to be elected to the Board of Directors. He also informed that according to the bye-laws of the Society, there was no provision for reserving seats for members belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled tribes and also for women. It is the case of the petitioner that ihere is non-compliance with the statutory requirement of section 28-A of the Co-operative Societies Act and hence he has requested for issue of a writ of mandamus.
( 5 ) IT is not necessary for me to go into the merits of the case after perusing the statement of objections filed by res- pondent-3, who is the Mysore Powerloom silk Manufacturers Co-operative Society limited, Bangalore, represented by its vice-President.
( 6 ) IN the statement of objections filed by respondent 3, vide para 4, it is stated that in accordance with the procedure prescribed in the Act and the Rules made thereunder, amendment to bye-law no. 35 of the Society was approved at the General Body Meeting of the Society at the meeting held on 19-11-1984 and that the Society forwarded the said resolution amending the bye-law to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies for registration under cover of their letter dated 16-1-1985 routed through the Joint Director of Industries and Commerce and Ex- officio Joint Registrar of Industrial Cooperative. It is further stated that along with the said letter, the Society also enclosed all the required forms duly filled in and signe
