VISHNU Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was nominated to the Board of Directors of the 2nd respondent-Society by the 1st respondent in the year 1991, in exercise of the power under Section 29(1) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 ('the Act' for short). The petitioner was later elected as the President of the Society on 3-5-1994 for the year 1994-95. Later, the 1st respondent-Government issued a Notification, dated 21-12-1994 withdrawing the nominations of Directors made all over the State, by Annexure-C, resulting in the petitioner ceasing to be a nominated member and consequently, as the President of the Board of Directors came to an end. The petitioner questions the Notification dated 21-12-1994, Annexure-C.

(2.) The learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that theremoval of all the nominated Directors en masse by the 1st respondent is illegal. He further contends that the petitioner, on election as the President of the Board of Directors, was entitled to continue for one calendar year ending with 2-5-1995 and that he is entitled to hold office during the said period and his membership as a Director of the Board cannot be terminated by the impugned order.

(3.) The petitioner was appointed as a Director of the Society under Section 29(1) of the Act. The petitioner holds office as a member of the Committee as a nominated member during the pleasure of the State Government under sub-section (2) of Section 29. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is based on Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi v State of Uttar Pradesh and Others, where the Law Officers in the entire State of Uttar Pradesh were removed at one stroke, where under the rules, the Law Officers could be removed by the State Government without assigning any reasons. The said decision is not applicable to the facts of the present case for the simple reason that there was no provision similar to sub-section (2) of Section 29 in the provisions under which the petitioners therein were appointed. In the case on hand, the petitioner holds office during the pleasure of the State Government.