SADBHAV NAGRIK SAHKARI BANK MARYADIT vs REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

1997 Supreme(MP) 357

High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
D. P. S. Chauhan
SADBHAV NAGRIK SAHKARI BANK MARYADIT - Appellant
Versus
REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY - Respondents
W. P. 2236 Of 1997
Decided On : 07/03/1997

Important Points

The term of the Committee of Management of a co-operative society is five years from the date of the first meeting of the committee, as per Section 48(2) of the Madhya Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 and Bye-law 28(7) of the Bank's Bye-laws. The Registrar has no jurisdiction to limit the term of the first committee of management to one year.

Subject

Co-operative Societies - TERM OF COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT

Act Referred

MADHYA PRADESH CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT : S.49(8), S.48(2), S.77, S.48(1)

Headnote

CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT - SECTION 48(2), 49(7-A)(I), 77(1)(B) - BYE-LAW 28(7), 28(8) - TERM OF COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT - INTERPRETATION - ELECTION - SUPERSESSION OF COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT - JURISDICTION OF REGISTRAR - ALTERNATIVE REMEDY - WRIT PETITION - MAINTAINABILITY.

Fact of the Case:

Petitioner challenged the order of the Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, appointing an Administrator in place of the Committee of Management of Nagarik Sahkari Bank Limited, Chhatarpur, under Section 49(8) of the Madhya Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (the Act). The petitioner contended that the order was without jurisdiction as the term of the Committee of Management was five years under Section 49(7-A) of the Act and Bye-law 28(7) of the Bank's Bye-laws.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the order of the Joint Registrar was without jurisdiction and quashed it. The court held that the term of the Committee of Management was five years from the date of the first meeting of the committee, as per Section 48(2) of the Act and Bye-law 28(7) of the Bank's Bye-laws. The court also held that the Registrar had no jurisdiction to limit the term of the first committee of management to one year, as was done in the impugned order.

Issues: 1. Whether the order of the Joint Registrar appointing an Administrator in place of the Committee of Management was without jurisdiction? 2. Whether the term of the Committee of Management was five years or one year?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the order of the Joint Registrar was without jurisdiction because it was passed under Section 49(8) of the Act, which did not relate to any irregularity or illegality. The court held that the supersession of the Committee of Management could only be done under Section 49(7-A) of the Act, which provided for supersession in case of irregularities or illegalities. 2. The court held that the term of the Committee of Management was five years from the date of the first meeting of the committee, as per Section 48(2) of the Act and Bye-law 28(7) of the Bank's Bye-laws. The court held that the Registrar had no jurisdiction to limit the term of the first committee of management to one year, as was done in the impugned order.

Final Decision: The court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned order, and restored the Committee of Management of the Bank. The court directed that elections be held in accordance with law.

Advocates Appeared:
A.S.GAHARWAR, V.K.TANKHA

D. P. S. CBAUHAN, J.

( 1 ) THIS petition is directed against the order dated 23. 5. 1997 (Annexure-P-12) passed by the Joint Registrar. Co-operative Societies Sagar division Sagar whereby he, in exercise of his powers under Section 49 (8) of the madhya Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the act) appointed the Assistant Registrar Co-operative Societies (Administration)chhatarpur as Administrator of the Nagarik Sahkari Bank Limited, Chhatarpur in place of its Committee of Management.

( 2 ) THIS Court on 2. 6. 1997 admitted the writ petition and directed for issuance of notice on interim relief. The service of the notices on all the respondents except respondents No. 3 and 4 is effected. So far as the respondent No. 3 is concerned, he is impleaded by name, what is the reason for impleading the respondent No. 3 by name is not disclosed in the petition. Against the respondent No. 3 the allegation is that for conduct of the election, so far as the expenses are concerned, an amount of rs. one lac has been demanded by him. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that this amount is exhorbitant for the purpose of holding election for the membership of the committee of the Management. He states that he does not want to press the present writ petition and wants to withdraw his allegation. He is permuted to do so. The respondent No. 3 is the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies Chhatarpur. He is an official party and the State can represent him. Thus, the respondents No. 1, 2 and 4 are represented by State Government.

( 3 ) LEARNED Counsel confining himself to the circumscribed limit regarding the order dated 23. 5. 1997 (Annexure P-12) appointing the Administrator in place of the committee of Management of Nagarik Sahkari Bank Limited, Chhatarpur, submitted that this order is without jurisdiction and deserves to be quashed. In this context the learned Counsel submitted that the order has been passed under Section 49 (8) of the Act and the same cannot exist under the law and the submission is that the term of the Committee of Management is provided under sub-section (7-A) of section 49 of the Act, to be five years. Apart from this, the Bye-law No. 28 (8) of the nagarik Sahkari Bank Marvadit. Chhatarpur, which is as extracted below :

( 4 ) THE learned Counsel submits that the words "ek Padawadhi" means one term, and this one term is for the first Committee of Management constituted after the registration of the Society. He submitted that the society was registered vide order dated 1. 9. 1995 on 4. 9. 1995, the Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies Sagar issued a certificate of registration of the Bank Communicating the registration number, wherein it was mentioned that Pravartak and the Founder Members of the Committee of the Management were nominated till the election. Thereafter vide the impugned order dated 14. 9. 1995 (Annexure-P-4) was passed, annulling the order dated 4. 9. 1995 and limiting the life of the committee of the Management for a period of one year, and since, on expiry of the period of one year, the Committee of the Management would have ceased to function, a Resolution was passed on 14. 8. 19% regarding extension of the tenure of the Founder Managing Committee, in line with the bye-laws for providing a term of five years. Since this writ petition involves the question of law for determination, it is proposed to be disposed of finally, with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. Sub-section (2) of Section 48 of the Act states that "subject to sub-section (1), the management of every society shall vest in a committee constituted in accordance with this Act or rules made thereunder or, Bye-laws of the society and it shall exercise such powers and perform such duties as may be conferred or imposed respectively by the Act or rules made thereunder or Bye-laws of the society. "

( 5 ) THE question for consideration is which committee should be described as the Committee of