RAGHUR NAGARAJA NAIDU Vs. RAILWAYMEN'S HOUSE BUILDING

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is presently working as Senior Section Officer (Electrical) in Indian Railways. 1st respondent is the Society registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (for short, 'the Act'). It is formed for the benefit of the employees of Indian Railways, in particular, to meet the housing needs of the employees by providing sites to its members.

(2.) PETITIONER claims to have joined the 1st respondent- Society as a primary member during the year 2008. Every five years, Directors are elected from amongst the members of the 1st respondent-Society by secret ballot. Out of the elected Directors, office bearers such as President, Vice- President and Treasurer are chosen. The term of the Directors elected during March 2008 has expired in March 2013. Calendar of events have been published on 16.08.2013 for the purpose of holding elections. As per the said calendar of events which is produced at Annexure-L, the last date for filing nominations is 30.08.2013. The date of election is scheduled on 07.09.2013. Though the petitioner intends to contest the election, as his membership is cancelled, his name is not found in the voters list. Having learnt that his name is not found in the voters list published, he has approached this Court seeking a writ of mandamus against the 1st respondent-Society to restore his membership to the Society and to include his name in the voters list. He has also sought for a direction to respondents 1 to 4 to accept his nomination for the election to the post of Director to the 1st respondent-Society scheduled to be held on 07.09.2013.

(3.) CONTENDING that in such circumstances this Court will have to interfere in the matter, reliance is placed by the learned Senior Counsel on the judgments in the case of M.E.EBRAHIM VS RETURNING OFFICER & OTHERS - 1995(6) KarLJ 470; and K.VENKATACHALAM VS A.SWAMICKAN & ANOTHER - 1999(4) SCC 526. Reliance is also placed on the judgment in the case of Dr. ASRANNA VS THE VIRAJPET TOWN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. - 1989(2) MysLJ 336. She also contends that removal of a member must be expressly mentioned in the agenda before it could be taken up for consideration and as there was no agenda in the meeting for removal of the petitioner as member, there was no notice to the petitioner of the intention to remove him and therefore, the removal was in breach of the principles of natural justice and hence, the writ petition is maintainable, even assuming that alternative remedy is available under Section 70 of the Act. M.E.Ebrahim's case referred to above is relied for this purpose.