Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
S.J.Kathawalla, Milind N.Jadhav, JJ.
Dattatray Genaba Lole - Appellant
Versus
Divisional Joint Registrar - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 5878 of 2021
Decided On : 26-11-2021
Whether this Court ought not to be entertained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India because the Petitioner has available to it an alternative and efficacious remedy to challenge the election itself under the provisions of the Act read with the Rules?
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner No. 3, Sangvi Sandas Vividh Karyakari, is a cooperative society under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 ( "the Act "). Petitioner No. 3 is a member of Pune District Central Coop. Bank, also a cooperative society under the Act and more specifically a federal society. Respondent No. 1 is the Divisional Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Pune Division @ District Coop. Election Officer, Pune. Respondent No. 2 is the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Pune. Respondent No. 3 is the CEO of the Pune District Central Cooperative Bank.
Finding of the Court:
The challenge in the present case does not fall within the limited scope of interference in the election process at the intermediate stage under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Respondent No. 1, in the present case, has acted, on the face of it, in exercise of power conferred upon it under the Act and Rules to adjudicate upon the Objection Application. In exercise of that power and discretion under Rule 11 of the Rules, a decision has been taken that the relevant date for determining whether the Petitioner No. 3 was a defaulter would be the cut-off date and not a later date, even though the election has been postponed. Such kinds of decisions at an intermediate stage, which arise more from an application of provisions to individual cases in exercise of express powers to draw up a provisional voters list by no means fall within the category of cases in which patently illegal processes have been followed as mentioned above. We are not at this stage opining on the merits of a challenge on this ground that may be raised after the elections have concluded under Sec. 91 of the Act read with the Rules. We are, however, of the view that this kind of challenge at an intermediate stage of the election process would not justify exercise of our extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India at this stage.
Issues: Whether this Court ought not to be entertained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India because the Petitioner has available to it an alternative and efficacious remedy to challenge the election itself under the provisions of the Act read with the Rules?
Ratio Decidendi: The preparation of electoral roll is an intermediate stage of the election process of the specified societies. This being the consistent view of the High Court on the interpretation of provisions of a State Act, the same is not required to be disturbed unless it is shown that such a view of the High Court is palpably wrong or ceased to be good law in view of amendment in the Act or any subsequent declaration of law. We are, therefore, of the view that the preparation of the electoral roll for election of the specified society under Chapter XI-A and the Rules framed thereunder is an intermediate stage in the process of election for constituting the Managing Committee of a specified society.
Final Decision: Writ Petition is dismissed.
JUDGMENT
1. Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are members of the Petitioner No. 3 Society. Petitioner No. 3, Sangvi Sandas Vividh Karyakari, is itself a cooperative society under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 ( "the Act "). Petitioner No. 3 is a member of Pune District Central Coop. Bank, also a cooperative society under the Act and more specifically a federal society. Respondent No. 1 is the Divisional Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Pune Division @ District Coop. Election Officer, Pune. Respondent No. 2 is the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Pune. Respondent No. 3 is the CEO of the Pune District Central Cooperative Bank.
CHALLENGE IN BRIEF
2. As a member, Petitioner No. 3 in the ordinary course would have a right to vote in the elections of office bearers of Respondent No. 3. Petitioner No. 3 would be entitled to exercise its vote through representatives duly nominated by it.
3. The present Petition challenges an Order of Respondent No. 1 dated 29/9/2021 ( "the Impugned Order ") by which Objection Application No. 54/2021 ( "Objection Application ") was rejected. The Objection Application was filed by Petitioner No. 1. The Objection Application took exception to the exclusion of the name of Petitioner No. 3 from the Preliminary Voters List prepared in relation to the elections to be held of Respondent No. 3 Society, of which Petitioner No. 3 is a member. The Objection Application was rejected by Respondent No. 1 inter alia because on the cut-off date for determining the eligibility of voters as part of the election process of Respondent No. 3, i.e., 4th May 2020, Petitioner No. 3 was in arrears of dues payable to Respondent No. 3 and that the dues were repaid only 16 months thereafter. Another relevant date taken into consideration whilst rejecting the Objection Application was 6th January 2020, which was when Petitioner No. 3 passed a resolution appointing its Director to represent it in the voting at the proposed elections of Respondent No. 3. The Impugned Order also holds that on that date too Petitioner No. 3 was a defaulter. Petitioner No. 3 cleared these dues 16 months later by 13th September 2021. Respondent No. 1 was of the view that Petitioner No. 3 s status as 'defaulter ' on the cut-off date disentitled it to vote or feature in the Preliminary Voter List. Thus, on this ground the Objection Application was rejected by the Impugned Order.
FACTS
4. The facts and circumstances leading to the Impugned Order are briefly set out below.
4.1 On 17th December 2019 a notification was issued by Respondent No. 1 notifying the elections of the Managing Committee of Respondent No. 3 - Pune District Central Coop. Bank. Pune District Central Coop. Bank is a federal society. The tenure of erstwhile Managing Committee was to expire on 4th May 2020. The new Managing Committee would be elected for a term of five years from 2020-2025. The members of Pune District Central Coop. Bank that are entitled to vote are those persons/societies that have been members of the federal society for a certain minimum duration prior to the cut off or qualification date of 4th May 2020. The required duration of membership to be so eligible depends upon whether the member is a society, such as Petitioner No. 3 (for which a 3 year prior membership is required), or an individual member (for which a 2 year prior membership is required).
4.2 The last date for filing resolutions by the members of Pune District Central Coop. Bank for the purpose of election of such proposed persons to the Managing Committee of Pune District Central Coop. Bank was 16th January 2020. The Petitioner No. 2 was nominated by Petitioner No.3 as part of this process on 6th January 2020. The time for filing such resolutions was thereafter extended upto 22/02/2021.
4.3 On 25th August 2021, the provisional list of voters was forwarded by Respondent No. 3 to Respondent No. 1. This is a requirement under Rule 9(1) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies (Election to
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
