SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2012 Supreme(Cal) 479

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Pratap Kumar Ray, Subal Baidya, JJ.
The Jalpaiguri Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
Rakesh Purkait & Ors.
A.S.T. 108 of 2012, A.S.T.A. 68 of 2012
Decided On : June 4, 2012

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Tarun Kumar Ray, Dinesh Chandra Nandi, Biplab Ranjan Bose and Arnab Ray for the appellants
Mr. Sadhan Kumar Halder and Monoranjan Jana for the State
Mr. Krishnendu Banerjee for the respondent no.4

The consultation requirement in the proviso to Section 35(1) of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 2006 is triggered only when the State Government, after analyzing the allegations and the Board's reply, forms a prima facie opinion that dissolution of the Board is warranted. Prior consultation with the Reserve Bank of India is not required at the stage of issuing a show-cause notice.

Headnote:

CO-OPERATIVE BANK - DISSOLUTION OF BOARD - SECTION 35 OF THE WEST BENGAL CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 2006 - PRIOR CONSULTATION WITH RESERVE BANK OF INDIA - NECESSITY - INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 35(1) AND ITS PROVISO.

Fact of the Case:

The Jalpaiguri Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. (the Bank) challenged a show-cause notice issued by the State Government under Section 35(1) of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 2006 (the Act), seeking to dissolve the Bank's Board of Directors. The Bank contended that the show-cause notice was not maintainable as it was issued without prior consultation with the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), as required by the proviso to Section 35(1) of the Act.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the proviso to Section 35(1) of the Act would be attracted only if, after analyzing the factual matrix of the allegations and the Board's reply, the State Government formed a prima facie opinion that dissolution of the Board was warranted. Until such a stage was reached, consultation with the RBI was not necessary.

Issues: 1. Whether the show-cause notice issued under Section 35(1) of the Act was maintainable without prior consultation with the RBI. 2. Interpretation of Section 35(1) and its proviso.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. Section 35(1) of the Act empowers the State Government to initiate proceedings for dissolution of a Co-operative Society's Board, including a Co-operative Bank's Board, upon giving proper show-cause notice and hearing, and thereafter by issuing a notification assigning reasons for such dissolution. 2. The proviso to Section 35(1) requires prior consultation with the RBI before dissolving the Board of a Co-operative Bank covered by Chapter V of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. 3. The consultation provision in the proviso is triggered only when the State Government, after analyzing the allegations and the Board's reply, forms a prima facie opinion that dissolution of the Board is warranted. 4. Prior consultation with the RBI is not required at the stage of issuing a show-cause notice, as the purpose of the show-cause notice is to give the Board an opportunity to respond to the allegations and present its defense.

Final Decision: The Court dismissed the writ petition, appeal, and stay application filed by the Bank, holding that the writ application was not maintainable as the show-cause notice was issued in accordance with the law.

JUDGMENT

Pratap Kumar Ray, J. – Heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties.

2. Assailing the interim order dated 17th April, 2012 passed by the learned trial Judge in W.P. 6863 (W) of 2012, this appeal has been preferred.

3. The stay application has been moved today in connection with this appeal.

4. Having regard to the tenor of the order impugned and having regard to the question of maintainability of the writ application, which we have heard at length, we are of the view that appeal and stay application and concerned writ application could be disposed of by us by a common judgment.

5. Writ application accordingly is taken by us by exercising our appellate jurisdiction.

6. From the writ application and the stay application filed by the writ petitioner in connection with the writ and the appeal it appears that assailing the initiation of a proceeding under Section 35 of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 2006, writ application was moved. Section 35 of the said Act reads such:

“35. Dissolution of the board and appointment of administrator. - (1) If, on receipt of a report from the Registrar, the State Government is of opinion that-

(a) any board-

(i) has persistently made defaults, or has been grossly negligent, in the performance of its duties under this Act or the rules or the by-laws, or

(ii) has committed any act prejudicial to the interest of the concerned cooperative society or the members of any other co-operative society; or

(iii) has wilfully disobeyed or wilfully failed to comply with any lawful order or direction of the State Government or the Registrar issued under this Act; or

(b) the affairs and business of any co-operative society has com to a stalemate due to persistent default or negligence in the performance of duties by its board, the State Government may, after service of a notice upon the board and giving it an opportunity for stating its objections and upon hearing such objections, by a notification stating reasons therefor, dissolve the board, the directors of which shall forthwith vacate their offices and by the said notification [the State Government shall appoint one or more of its officers to manage the affairs of one or more co-operative societies who shall be called the administrator or administrators, as the case may be] for a period not exceeding six months and may also, by notification extend such period so, however, that the total period shall not exceed one year in any case:

Provided that the State Government shall not take any step towards immediate dissolution of the board of directors of the State Co-operative Bank or the Central Cooperative Land Development Bank or any Central Co-operative Bank or such other Cooperative Bank as comes within the provision of Part V of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (10 of 1949), without prior consultation with the Reserve Bank of India or the national Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development, as the case may be:

Provided further that the Registrar shall reconstitute an elected board of directors of the co-operative society in a general meeting to be convened for the purpose in accordance with the Act, rules and by-laws within the tenure of the office of the administrator as specified in the notification so that he may make over his charge to the newly elected board before expiry of his tenure.

[(1A) if an elected Board cannot be reconstituted within the period of one year from the date of dissolution of the board, the administrator shall be removed from his office by the State Government and thereupon the provision contained in subsection (7) of section 29 shall be followed.]

(2) During the tenure of office of the administrator appointed under subsection (1)-

(a) all properties of the co-operative society shall vest in the Registrar; and

(b) subject to the control of the Registrar and notwithstanding the preferring of any appeal under section 147, the administrator shall exercise all the powers and perform all the duties which may be e



































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top