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

2023 Supreme(Cal) 1186

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA, J.
Malda District Central Cooperative Bank Employees Association and Others – Petitioners
Versus
The State of West Bengal and Others – Respondents
WPA No. 15513 of 2023
Decided On : 02-08-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Arnab Saha, Mr. Abhimanyu Banerjee, Ms. Roshni Kalam.
For the Respondents: Ms. Sonal Sinha, Mr. Tarun Kumar Chatterjee, Mr. Sujit Gupta, Mr. Sayan Datta, Mr. Soumen Chatterjee, Mr. Amarendra Chakraborty.

Cooperative societies are democratic institutions owned, managed and controlled by members for their economic and social betterment, operating their business based on mutual aid and cooperative principles. The State shall not interfere in the management and operation of the cooperative societies.

Headnote:

COOPERATIVE SOCIETY - DEPUTATION OF EMPLOYEES FOR ELECTION DUTY - WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTION COMMISSION ACT, 1994 - WEST BENGAL COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 2006 - WEST BENGAL COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES RULES, 2011 - EMPLOYEES OF MALDA DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK NOT COVERED UNDER SECTION 6 OF THE 1994 ACT.

Fact of the Case:

Petition challenging the deputation of employees of Malda District Central Cooperative Bank for election duty in polling stations for the Panchayat elections. Issue arose whether the Bank comes within the purview of Government-run institutions, which would bring its employees within the fold of Section 6 of the West Bengal State Election Commission Act, 1994.

Finding of the Court:

The Bank is neither Government aided nor is financially controlled by the Government of West Bengal to such an extent that it falls within the purview of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. The CEO, who is deputed by the Government, is under the control of the Board and the Chairman. The Board of Directors has an elected majority and the State Government nominee director has a limited role. The State Government does not have any executive control or administrative control over the Bank. The State Government does not have any financial control over the Bank either. The deputation of employees of the Bank for election duty is de hors the law and cannot be sanctioned.

Issues: Whether the Malda District Central Cooperative Bank comes within the purview of Government-run institutions, which would bring its employees within the fold of Section 6 of the West Bengal State Election Commission Act, 1994.

Ratio Decidendi: The Bank is not controlled, financed, aided or run by the State Government for the purpose of coming within the purview of Section 6 of the West Bengal State Election commission Act, 1994 or other pari materia statutes. The State Government does not have any jurisdiction or authority to depute employees of the above named Bank for election duty in polling stations in respect of Panchayat polls.

Final Decision: WPA No.15513 of 2023 is disposed of accordingly, in the light of the above observations. There will be no order as to costs.

JUDGMENT :

(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.) :

1. The petitioner no.1 is an association of the employees of the Malda District Central Cooperative Bank, a co-operative bank formed under the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as, “the 2006 Act”).

2. The members of the petitioner no.1-Association were deputed in polling stations for the Panchayat Elections which was concluded recently in West Bengal. As per Section 6 of the West Bengal State Election Commission Act, 1994 (for short, “the 1994 Act”) and the Panchayat Laws, as well as the Handbook for Returning Officers issued by the West Bengal State Election Commission, polling personnel for the Panchayat Elections were to be deployed from among employees of the Central and State Governments as well as local bodies and primary schools and colleges, working under the State Government.

3. The moot question which arises for consideration in the present case is whether the Malda District Central Cooperative Bank (in brief, “the Bank”) comes within the purview of Government-run institutions, which would bring its employees within the fold of Section 6 of the 1994 Act, for the purpose of deputation in polling stations.

4. The Bank, which has been arrayed as respondent no.9, has filed a short report on the query of Court as to whether the Bank is Government aided and/or run under Government control, either on the administrative or on the financial side.

5. With the report, the Bank has also annexed its audited accounts, primarily the schedule of its balance-sheet and profit and loss accounts.

6. Apart from citing provisions of the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Rules, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as, “the 2011 Rules”), it is disclosed in the Bank’s report that, as per audited financial statements of the Bank as on March 31, 2023, the Government of West Bengal holds 55,480 shares of Rs.100 each, totaling to Rs.55.48 lakh, in the Bank. Other shareholders, together, hold 9,82,030 shares of Rs.100 each, totaling to Rs.9,82.03 lakh. The total share capital of the Bank is Rs.1037.51 lakh.

7. A glance at the schedule of the balance-sheet and profit and loss accounts of the Bank does not indicate any noticeable influx of finance directly from the Government.

8. The shareholding pattern overwhelmingly indicates that the State is not a majority shareholder of the Bank by any stretch of imagination.

9. Hence, it cannot be said that the Bank is either Government aided or is financially controlled by the Government of West Bengal to such an extent that it falls within the purview of Article 12 of the Constitution of India.

10. Admittedly, the Central Executive Officer (CEO) of the Bank is nominated by the State Government.

11. Rule 56(1) of the 2011 Rules provides that a Government Officer, when deputed to the service of a cooperative society under Section 53 of the 2006 Act, shall be called the Chief Executive Officer or by whatever designation called.

12. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 56 stipulates that, subject to such conditions as the State Government may impose, the CEO, “under control of the Board and the Chairman”, shall, in the conduct of the business of the Society, exercise certain powers such as having control over the employees of the society, to sanction leave, the impose any punishment or to suspend them and to institute, defend and conduct legal proceedings and enter into compromise or arbitration with creditors and debtors of the society.

13. Rule 56 lays down the functions of the CEO more elaborately, which includes key functions like receiving all moneys on behalf of the society, operating bank accounts, negotiating bills of exchange, paying costs and management and working expenses, etc.

14. A composite reading of Rules 56 and 57 indicate that the CEO exercises important functions in the society. However, the lifeblood of the powers of a CEO deputed by the State Government is encapsulated in the phrase “under control of the Board and the Chairman”.

15. H

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