Back
PATNA HIGH COURT
V.Ramaswami and N.L.Untwalia JJ.
Umakant Singh
Versus
Binda Choudhary
Miscellaneous Judicial Case No. 95 of 1964 ; 112 of 1964 ; 119 of 1964 ; 345 of 1964 ; 462 of 1964 ;
Decided On : DECEMBER 17, 1964
ELECTION - PANCHAYAT SAMITIS AND ZILA PARISHADS ACT, 1961 - ELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES - RULE 3 OF THE BIHAR PANCHAYAT SAMITIS AND ZILA PARISHADS (ELECTIONS, CO-OPTIONS AND ELECTION PETITIONS) RULES, 1963 - VALIDITY - LIST OF SECRETARIES TO BE OBTAINED FROM ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES - ELECTION HELD ON THE BASIS OF LIST NOT OBTAINED FROM ASSISTANT REGISTRAR - INVALID.
Fact of the Case:
Election of representatives of co-operative societies to panchayat samitis under the Bihar Panchayat Samitis and Zila Parishads Act, 1961, was challenged on two grounds: (i) that Rule 3 of the Bihar Panchayat Samitis and Zila Parishads (Elections, Co-options and Election Petitions) Rules, 1963, prescribing the manner of election was constitutionally invalid; and (ii) that the Returning Officer did not obtain a list of Secretaries from the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies as required by the said rule.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that Rule 3 of the Rules, as it was, was defective and invalid as it did not provide a procedure for filing and settlement of objections to the electors list supplied by the Assistant Registrar of Co operative Societies.
Issues: 1. Whether Rule 3 of the Bihar Panchayat Samitis and Zila Parishads (Elections, Co-options and Election Petitions) Rules, 1963, was constitutionally invalid? 2. Whether the Returning Officer was required to obtain a list of Secretaries from the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies as required by Rule 3 of the Rules?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court relied on the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Chief Commissioner of Ajmer V/s. Radhey Shyam Dani, (S) AIR 1957 SC 304, which held that it is essential for proper electoral rolls to be maintained and that opportunity should be given to the parties concerned to scrutinise the electors list and raise objections. The Court held that Rule 3 of the Rules, which did not provide for such a procedure, was defective and invalid. 2. The Court held that the Returning Officer was required to obtain the list of Secretaries from the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies as required by Rule 3 of the Rules. The Court held that a list signed by some other officer or somebody else on behalf of the Co-operative Societies, even assuming it to have been physically supplied by the Assistant Registrar, was not sufficient and insubstantial compliance with the requirement of the rule.
Final Decision: The Court allowed the applications and set aside the elections of the representatives of the Co-operative Societies to the Panchayat Samitis in the various Blocks.
Untwalia, J.
1. In all these live cases the election under Clause (iii) of Sec. 5 of the Bihar Panchayat Samitis and Zila Parishads Act, 1961 (Bihar Act VI of 1962), hereinafter called the Act, of the representatives of the different Co-operative Societies in the different Blocks by the Secretaries thereof from amongst themselves to the various Panchayat Samitis. has been challenged on two grounds: (i) that Rule 3 of the Bihar Panchayat Samitis and Zila Parishads (Elections, Co-options and Election Petitions) Rules, 1963, hereinafter called the Rules, prescribing the manner of the election under the said provision of the Act, as it stood at the relevant time, was constitutionally invalid; and (ii) that the Returning Officer did not obtain a list of Secretaries from the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies as required by the said rule for the purpose of convening a meeting for election of the representatives specified in Clause (iii) of Sec. 5 of the Act.
2. There have been many amendments in the Act and the Rules in the year 1964. But since we are concerned in all these five cases with the elections which were held in the year 1963, I shall refer to the relevant provisions of the Act and Rules as they stood prior to the amendments. Sec. 6 of the Act providing for composition of Panchayat Samitis in various blocks stated:
"Every Panchayat Samiti shall consist of the following members, namely :-
** ** ** **
(iii) three representatives of the different co-operative societies in the Block other Shan a Central Co-operative Bank to be elected by the secretaries thereof from amongst themselves in the prescribed manner;"
In exercise of the powers conferred by section 75 of the Act, the State Government made Rules prescribing the manner of the said election, and Rule 3 of the Rules read as follows:-
-
"For election of the members specified in Clause (iii) of Sec. 5 by the Secretaries of the different co-operative societies in the Block (hereinafter referred to as electors in this chapter) other than a Central Co-operative Bank the Sub divisional Officer or any other officer appointed by the Collector in this behalf shall act as "the Returning Officer" and such Returning Officer shall after obtaining a list of Secretaries from the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, convene a meeting for such election on such date, lime and place as may be fixed by him within the Block and shall preside over such meeting."
Rule 4 said:-
"The Returning Officer shall in the meeting referred to in Rule 3, call for nomination papers of candidate desirous of being elected as members of the Panchayat Samiti."
Rules 5 and 6 prescribed the manner of the filing and scrutiny of the nomination papers for election of the members of the Panchayat Samiti by the Secretaries of the different Cooperative Societies in the Block. Rules 7 to 11 provided the procedure of declaring the result of uncontesled candidates and, in case of contest, the manner of taking the poll and declaration of the results after the contest. Under Clause (viii) of Rule 2 of the Rules " elector means a person who is entitled to vote in a particular election". It is manifest that for the purposes of electing three representatives of the different Co-operative Societies in the Block to be elected by the Secretaries thereof from amongst themselves, the whole and solo basis of a person being an elector for the pur poses of the said election was the list of Secretaries obtained by the Returning Officer from the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies. No procedure was prescribed for filing of any objection before any authority for the purpose of challenging the correctness of the list supplied by the Assistant Registrar, in respect of which various kinds of disputes could and did crop up, to wit, (i) whether a particular Cooperative Society and its Secretary were included in the list or not; (ii) whether the person mentioned as the Secretary of the particular Co-operati
AI
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
