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

2016 Supreme(J&K) 154

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
Alok Aradhe, J.
Ladies Cooperative House Building Society - Appellant
Vs.
State and Ors. - Respondents
OWP Nos. 1368/2013, 1116/2013, 1166/2015, 114/2015, 276/2015, 1411/2014, 523/ 2014 and 1860/2014
Decided On : 24-10-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : B.S. Salathia, B.S. Manhas, Meenakshi Salathia, Ankush Manhas, S.K. Shukla, Abhinav Sharma and K. Nirmal Kotwal.
For the Respondents: R.S. Jamwal and Ankesh Chandel.

The amendment to Rule 16 was held to be within the purview of Section 176 of the Act and aimed to regulate the conduct of elections, ensuring timely elections for the governing body of the society.

Headnote:

Cooperative Societies - Validity of SRO 236 of 2013 - Jammu and Kashmir Cooperative Societies Act 1989, Section 29, Section 176 - The court discussed the validity of SRO 236 of 2013 which amended Rule 16 of the Jammu and Kashmir Cooperative Societies Rules. The key legal provisions discussed were Section 29 and Section 176 of the Act, which mandate the election and nomination of members of committees and empower the state government to frame rules for cooperative societies.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners challenged the validity of SRO 236 of 2013, which amended Rule 16 of the Jammu and Kashmir Cooperative Societies Rules, alleging that it destroyed the autonomous character of the society and made the management subservient to the Registrar and other officers of the Cooperative Department.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the amendment to Rule 16 was within the purview of Section 176 of the Act, as it aimed to regulate the conduct of elections and ensure that elections of the governing body of the society were held as per schedule after the completion of the tenure of the elected bodies of the cooperative societies. The court directed the Registrar Cooperative Societies to conduct elections for the management/committees boards whose terms had expired within one month and complete the process of election within two months.

Issues: Validity of SRO 236 of 2013, autonomy of the cooperative society, authority of the Registrar to conduct elections

Ratio Decidendi: The amendment to Rule 16 was held to be within the purview of Section 176 of the Act and aimed to regulate the conduct of elections, ensuring timely elections for the governing body of the society.

Final Decision: The court directed the Registrar Cooperative Societies to conduct elections for the management/committees boards whose terms had expired within one month and complete the process of election within two months.

ORDER :

Alok Aradhe, J.

1. In this bunch of writ petitions preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 103 of the Constitution of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the petitioners have assailed the validity of SRO 236 of 2013 dated 25.04.2013 by which Rule 16 of Jammu and Kashmir Co-operative Societies Rules has been amended. For the facility of reference, facts from OWP No. 1368/2013 are being referred to.

2. The petitioner is the Secretary of Multipurpose Cooperative Society Jakh, Tehsil and District Jammu. It is the case of the petitioners that Jammu And Kashmir Cooperative Societies Act 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') was enacted with an object to give complete internal autonomy. Under Section 176 of the Act, the state Government has power to frame Rules. The State Government under the Act has framed Rules namely Jammu and Kashmir Cooperative Societies Rules 2001. It is averred in the writ petition that under Rule 16 of Rules, elections of members of the committee i.e. Board of Society other than Agricultural Credit Society shall be held on such date as may be specified by the Registrar and shall be conducted under the control of Assistant Commissioner (Revenue). It is further averred that since there was direct interference of the State Government and autonomous character of society was being jeopardized, therefore, SRO 1 of 2005 dated 04.01.2005 was promulgated and amendment was made in Rule 16(1) & (2) which reads as under:-

"16(1) The election of the Members of the Committee/Board of any Society having jurisdiction in a District shall be held on such date as may be specified by the Governing Body of the Society within three months of expiry of its term. The notices to this effect shall be circulated by the Managing Committee/Board to all Members. Copies of the notices shall be sent to the Dy. Registrar and Registrar Cooperatives Societies for reference and record.

(2) The Returning Officer shall be appointed by the Managing Committee/Board. He shall be of social standing, known for his honesty and integrity and acceptable to majority of the Members."

However, subsequently SRO 236 of 2013 dated 25.04.2013 was enacted by which SRO 1 of 2005 was amended and in particular Rule 16 of the Rules was amended which reads as under:

Rule 16:

(1) The election of the Members of the committee/Board of any Cooperative Society having jurisdiction within a District, shall be held on such date as may be specified by the Registrar and shall be conducted under the control of Assistant Commissioner (Revenue) within whose jurisdiction registered office of the Co-operative Society is situated, by such Returning Officer and other officers as may be appointed by him/her in this behalf.

(2) The election of Members of a Committee/Board of any Cooperative Society having jurisdiction in two or more districts, shall be held on such dates as may be specified by the Registrar and shall be conducted under the control of Dy. Commissioner of the District in which the registered office of the Co-operative Society is situated by such Returning Officer and other officers as may be appointed by him/her in this behalf.

In the aforesaid background, the petitioner has challenged the vires of Rule 16 of the Rules incorporated vide SRO 236 of 2013 dated 25.04.2013.

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners in OWP No. 1368/2013, OWP No. 114/ 2015, OWP No. 276/2015 and OWP No. 1141/2014 while inviting attention of this Court submitted that learned Single Judge while deciding OWP No. 1380/2014 which was decided on 30.11.2015 has decided the writ petition without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. It is further submitted that the aforesaid order was upheld in the appeal, by the Division Bench. It is also pointed out that with the leave of the Division Bench, the petitioners have preferred an appeal against the order dated 30.11.2015 passed in OWP No. 1380/2014 at Srinagar Wing. It is also stated by learned seni


























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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