1998 Supreme(Ker) 343
Judges : G.VISWANATHA IYER
TIRUR SERVICE CO-OP.BANK - Appellant
Versus
JOINT REGISTRAR - Respondent
Case No : O.P. No. 3608 of 1988
Decided On : 08/18/1988
Advocates Appeared :
P.V. Lohitakshan; For Petitioner M.R. Rajendran Nair; For Respondents
The computation of the committee's term should be based on the year of the Society when a definite date is fixed for the expiry of the term.
Headnote:
Election Dispute - Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 - S.28, R.35, R.39 - The court discussed the controversy arising from the change in the year of the Society and the term of the managing committee, and interpreted the provisions of the Act and bye-laws to determine the expiry date of the committee's term. The court held that the committee's term should be computed with reference to the year of the Society, and dismissed the petition.
Fact of the Case:
The dispute arose from the change in the year of the Society and the term of the managing committee. The committee's term was extended to five years, and the year of the Society was changed to 'January-December' from 'September-August'. The controversy centered around the date of expiry of the committee's term.
Finding of the Court:
The court analyzed the provisions of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 and the bye-laws to determine the computation of the committee's term with reference to the year of the Society. The court concluded that the committee could have continued in office only till 31-12-1987 and dismissed the petition.
Issues: The main issue was the computation of the committee's term in relation to the changed year of the Society, leading to a dispute over the expiry date of the committee's term.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that when a definite date is fixed for the expiry of the term, the period ending with the said date for the first time will be taken as the first year of the term, and the term of office be reckoned accordingly.
Final Decision: The Original Petition was dismissed, and no costs were awarded.
1. Petitioner is the President of Tirur Service Co-operative Bank Ltd, a Society registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 (the Act for short). For purposes of convenience I shall hereinafter refer to the Bank as "the Society". Election to the managing committee of the Society was held on 28-8-1983, and the committee assumed office on 1-9-1983. in accordance with bye-law 35 (b) which specified the term of the committee as from 1st September to 31st August. As per bye-law 35 (a), as it then stood, the tenure of the committee was three years, that is, upto 31-8-1986. The bye-laws were subsequently amended at a general body meeting held on 24-8-1985. By the amendment, the term of the committee was increased to five years; and the year of the Society was changed to "January-December" from "September-August".
2. This change in the year to January-December has resulted in controversy about the date of expiry of the committee's term. According to the respondents, the committee's term of five years expired on 31-12-1987, whereas according to the petitioner it extends upto 31-12-1988. How exactly this dispute arises, I shall explain later.
3. The respondents did not apparently realise their stand in time, and the committee continued in office even after 31-12-1987. There was an inspection of the Society by the Co-operative Inspector, Tirur unit, on 23-4-1988, pursuant to which he submitted a report Ext. P3 pointing out that the term of the committee had expired on 31-12-1987. On receipt of this report, the Joint Registrar appointed an Administrator for the Society on 11-5-1988 under S.33 of the Act, to be in office for a period of four months, but the Administrator did not take charge because of the pendency of this original petition.
4. The committee had meanwhile passed resolution on 25-4-1988 to hold the election for the new committee on 26-6-1988. Request was made to the Assistant Registrar to appoint a Returning Officer, but no Returning Officer was appointed. The petitioner apprehended that an Administrator will be appointed and filed this original petition on 3-5-1988 for a declaration that the committee was entitled to continue in office till 31-12-1988, and for other consequential reliefs.
5. Petitioner's case is that the committee's term of five years is from 1-9-1983 to 31-8-1988. The year of the Society is from January to December after the amendment. According to the petitioner, this court has held in Mohammed Basheer v. State of Kerala 1987 (2) KLT 791 that a committee could continue in office till the expiry of the "year" in which its term comes to an end. Therefore the committee of the Society could remain in office till 31-12-1988, when the year of the Society (in which the five year term comes to an end) expires.
6. The Government Pleader points out on the other hand that when the year of the Society is from January to December, the first year of the, Committee expired on 31-12-1983 even though it was only a truncated period, and not a whole year. On this approach, the term of five years expired on 31-12-1987. The Committee has overstayed its term and therefore, an Administrator was liable to be appointed under S.33.
7. I must even at the outset state that the petitioner has grossly misunderstood.the decision in Mohammed Basheer and that it has no application to cases like this. That was a case in which the scope of R.39 (1) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules was under consideration. R.39 (1) requires the bye-laws of every Society to provide that the term of its Committee shall expire on the same date as may be specified. If no such date is specified in the bye-laws, the date of expiry of the term shall be 30th of June of that year in which the term expires. Interpreting this provision, the Division Bench held that if no definite date is fixed in the bye-laws for the expiry of the term of the Committee R.39 will operate and the term of the Committee will expire on the 30th of June of t