Bombay High Court
Bhaskar Sitaram Bapat
Versus
Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Bhor and others
Decided On:
An order under Section 78 is to be made by the Registrar and not by the state Government. Secondly, by the impugned order, the State Government has purported to remove the petitioner who is functioning as the Chairman of the Board of Management and to appoint a new Board consisting of three persons including the Respondent No.3. In the instant case the exercise of the power is patently illegal because thereby the Respondent No. 3 has been restored to hold office which he was otherwise disqualified to do. There is nothing on record to indicate that there has been any application of mind to the said fact of the Respondent No.3 being the member of a Board which had been removed and replaced by Board of Management. No reasons appear to have been indicated nor the particular provisions which are being exempted had been set out in the impugned order. The exercise of such power of exemption ought to be struck down. It would be however open to the State Government to pass a fresh order under Section 157 for enlarging the time limit for holding a fresh election for reconstitution of the Board. Therefore, the Registrar was directed to exercise his powers under Section 78 by appointing a new Board of Management in accordance with law.
For Citation : 1990 CTJ 527 (Bom)
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.