The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of sec. 27(3) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, regarding the eligibility of co-operative societies to be included in the voters list of a federal society.

JUDGMENT

1. By consent, heard finally at admission stage.

2. The petitioners are Co-operative Societies registered under the provisions of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as "the Societies Act"). By way of present writ petitions, the petitioners are challenging the legality, validity and propriety of the orders dtd. 15/1/2021 and 18/1/2021 respectively, passed by respondent No.5, thereby rejecting the objections raised by the petitioners for including the names of delegates of the petitioner societies in the final voters list in the ensuing elections of respondent No.6- Parbhani District Central Co-operative Bank Limited, Parbhani (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as "respondent No.6 Bank").

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that after registration of the petitioner societies, the petitioner societies have passed resolutions in the general body meetings for taking membership of respondent No.6 Bank and accordingly the applications for membership were filed. The petitioner societies have also purchased the share capital for the membership of respondent No.6 Bank on 3/2/2014, 15/9/2016, 28/8/2015, 15/1/2016, 5/9/2013, 24/6/2019, 20/5/2017 respectively. Learned counsel submits that in view of the provisions of sec. 27(3) of the Societies Act, any new member society of a federal society shall be eligible to vote in the affairs of that federal society only after completion of the period of three years from the date of its investing any part of its fund in the shares of such federal society.

Learned counsel submits that the petitioner societies have completed three years on 2/2/2017, 14/9/2019, 27/8/2018, 14/1/2019, 4/9/2016 respectively from the date of investment of its share in the federal society and as such, the petitioner societies are eligible to take part in the elections of respondent No.6 Bank. Learned counsel however fairly concedes that petitioner nos. 7 and 8 in Writ Petition No. 1734 of 2021 have not completed period of three years from the date of its investing any part of its fund in the shares of such federal society. Learned counsel submits that even respondent No.6 Bank has issued certificates on 3/1/2020, 2/1/2020, 22/1/2020, respectively certifying therein that the petitioner societies had paid the amount of shares on 3/2/2014, 15/9/2016, 28/8/2015, 15/1/2016, 5/9/2013, 24/6/2019, 20/5/2017 respectively and further, as per the said certificate, respondent No.6 Bank has formally affirmed the membership on 20/5/2017. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner societies have passed resolutions for sending the names of delegates to include the said names in the voters list of respondent No.6 Bank and in view of the same, names of the petitioner societies are required to be included in the provisional voters list of respondent No.6 Bank. Though respondent No.6 Bank has published the voters list on 16/3/2020, names of the petitioner societies were not included in the provisional voters list. Thus, the petitioners have filed objection on 17/3/2020, 16/3/2020, 6/1/2021 respectively. However, due to outbreak of COVID-19, the election programme of respondent No.6 Bank was postponed. Pursuant to the new election programme, the petitioner societies again filed written objection / written arguments on 12/1/2021 and 14/1/2021 respectively, with similar request for inclusion of names of the delegates of the petitioner societies in the voters list. Learned counsel submits that respondent No.5 has not considered the date of investment of shares for computing the period of three years and rejected the objections raised by the petitioners on 15/1/2021 and 18/1/2021 respectively.

Learned counsel for the petitioners, in order to substantiate his submissions, placed reliance on the following cases:-

1. Dudhganga Vikas Seva Sanstha Maryadit vs. Distt.

Collector, Kolhapur and Others, reported in (2006) 5 SCC 250.

2. Dhule Gramin Vikas Bhajipal