The provisions of section 73-B of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 do not require the Collector to reduce the number of seats for which elections are to be held on the ground that there is no candidate, amongst the validly nominated, who would be entitled to fill the reserved seat.

Headnote:
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES - ELECTION - RESERVATION OF SEATS - INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 73-B OF THE MAHARASHTRA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1960 - ELECTION OF PETITIONERS AS MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE OF RESPONDENT BANK - CHALLENGE TO ELECTION ON GROUND OF NON-COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 73-B - ORDER OF ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER SETTING ASIDE ELECTION - WRIT PETITION BY PETITIONERS - ISSUES - WHETHER ELECTION SUFFERED FROM NON-COMPLIANCE OF MANDATORY PROVISIONS OF SECTION 73-B - WHETHER RESULT OF ELECTION MATERIALLY AFFECTED DUE TO SAID NON-COMPLIANCE - WHETHER ELECTION VOID AB INITIO - WHETHER BYE-LAWS OF BANK INCONSISTENT WITH PROVISIONS OF SECTION 73-B - WHETHER PETITIONERS ENTITLED TO BE REINSTATED IN THEIR OFFICES AS BOARD OF DIRECTORS - WHETHER ORDER OF DISTRICT DEPUTY REGISTRAR APPOINTING COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT LIABLE TO BE QUASHED.
Fact of the Case:

Petitioners were elected as members of the Committee of respondent Bank. Respondent No. 5 challenged the election on the ground of non-compliance with section 73-B of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The Additional Commissioner set aside the election. Petitioners filed a writ petition challenging the order of the Additional Commissioner.
Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the election did not suffer from non-compliance of the mandatory provisions of section 73-B of the Act. The result of the election was not materially affected due to the said non-compliance. The election was not void ab initio. The bye-laws of the Bank were not inconsistent with the provisions of section 73-B. The petitioners were entitled to be reinstated in their offices as Board of Directors. The order of the District Deputy Registrar appointing a committee of management was liable to be quashed.
Issues: 1. Whether the election suffered from non-compliance of the mandatory provisions of section 73-B of the Act? 2. Whether the result of the election was materially affected due to the said non-compliance? 3. Whether the election was void ab initio? 4. Whether the bye-laws of the Bank were inconsistent with the provisions of section 73-B? 5. Whether the petitioners were entitled to be reinstated in their offices as Board of Directors? 6. Whether the order of the District Deputy Registrar appointing a committee of management was liable to be quashed?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Section 73-B of the Act provides for reservation of seats for members belonging to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes and weaker section of the members. The reservation is given effect to by co-option of the required number of members from amongst the persons entitled to such representation. 2. The bye-laws of the Bank provided for election of 14 members on the Board of Directors. The Collector had declared the programme of election for 14 Directors. No person belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes or weaker section was elected. The Additional Commissioner held that the election was contrary to the provisions of section 73-B of the Act. 3. The Court held that there is no separate electorate for the reserved seats. The result of the election has to be declared in accordance with the number of votes obtained by the respective candidates unless there is any specific provision indicating as to how the results are to be declared. 4. The Court further held that the bye-laws of the Bank were not inconsistent with the provisions of section 73-B. The Collector was not required to reduce the number of seats for which elections were to be held on the ground that there was no candidate, amongst the validly nominated, who would be entitled to fill the reserved seat. 5. The Court also held that the order of the District Deputy Registrar appointing a committee of management was liable to be quashed as it was based on the order of the Additional Commissioner setting aside the election of the petitioners.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed and the rule was made absolute in terms of prayer Clauses (c) and (c-1). Petitioners were granted costs of the petition from respondent No. 5. Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court was rejected. Operation of the order was stayed for a period of fortnight.

JUDGMENT - M.N. CHANDURKAR, Ag. C.J. :---This petition is directed against the order of the Additional Commissioner, Nasik Division, in an Election Petition under section 144-T of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 which was filed by respondent No. 5 challenging the election of the present petitioner as members of the Committee of respondent No. 1 which is the Nasik Merchants Co-operative Bank Limited, Nasik.

2. It is not in dispute that respondent No. 1 Bank is a Specified Society governed by the provisions of Chapter XI-A of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act'). The respondent No. 1 was declared as a specified society under section 73(G) of the Act in or about May 1981. The Bye-laws of the Bank provided that the Board of Directors of the Bank would consist of 15 members, out of which one member was to be co-opted from the financing bank i.e. Nasik District Central Co-operative Bank. The Collector, Nasik, respondent No. 6 had declared the programme of election on 29-10-1981 for the election of 14 Directors for the years 1981-82 to 1985-86. This election was contested by 47 candidates. The contest appears to be mainly between two panels. The petitioners belong to one panel and respondents Nos. 2 to 4 belong to another panel. There were 19 individual contestants. As a result of the counting the 11 petitioners and respondents Nos. 2 to 4 Nos. 2 to 4 were declared elected by the Collector, Nasik on 14-12-1981.

3. It is necessary at this stage to make a reference to the provisions of section 73-B of the Act. That section reads as follows :

"73-B. On the Committee of such Society or class of societies as the State Government may, by general or special order, direct, two seats shall be reserved, one for the members who belong to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes and one for the weaker section of the members who have been granted loans from the Society of an amount not exceeding Rs. 200/- during the year immediately preceding. If no such persons are elected, or appointed, the committee shall co-opt the required number of members on the committee from amongst the persons entitled to such representation."

The Explanation which declared that for the purpose of section 73-B the expression `Schedule Castes' includes `Nav-Boudhas' and the expression `Scheduled Tribes' includes `denotified Tribes and Nomadic Tribes' is not relevant for our purpose.

4. Admittedly the Bank is one of the societies to which section 73-B of the Act applies. Under that provision two seats on the committee are to be reserved, out of which one is to be reserved for the members who belong to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes and the other for weaker section of the members who have been granted loans from the society of an amount not exceeding Rs. 200/- during the year immediately preceding. Under section 73-B if no person of the above description is elected or appointed, the Committee has to co-opt the required number of members on the Committee from amongst the persons entitled to such representation.

5. Now, admittedly no person belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes or denotified Tribes or weaker section of the members was elected on 14-12-1981. After the first meeting of the elected Directors was held on 28-12-1981, petitioner No. 1 was elected as the Director of respondent No. 1-Bank and petitioner No. 2 was elected as Vice-Chairman. The meeting of the Board of Directors was to be held on 16-1-1982 for which the agenda was published on 11-1-1982. One of the items on the agenda for the meeting of 16-1-1982 was the co-option of the Directors from amongst the members belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes as well as from amongst economically backward members.

6. However, before this meeting was held, respondent No. 5 filed an election petition under section 144-T of the Act before the Additional Commissioner, Nasik Division, Nasik-respondent No. 8. Respondent N

Click Here to Read the rest of this document