(1.) This Original Petition filed by the Chairman of the Kerala State Co-operative Marketing Federation challenges the order Ext. P3 dated 5.1.2000 issued by the Government of Kerala in exercise of power under Section 31 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act nominating to the Managing Committee of the Kerala State Co-operative Marketing Federation three members and also nominating two other members, one a member of a Scheduled Caste and another, a woman in exercise of power under Section 28-A (3) of the Act. The challenge is confined to the nomination made under Section 28-A (3) of the Act. We are therefore, not concerned with the validity of the nominations made under Section 31 of the Act contained in Ext. P3 notification.
(2.) The Kerala State Co-operative Marketing Federation is an apex society as defined in Section 2 (a) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act. It has the State as its area of operation and it is having as its members other co-operative societies with similar objects and declared as such by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies. The election to the Managing Committee of the apex society was notified on 15.10.1999. The election was to be held on 20.11.1999. The nominations of certain candidates were rejected and those candidates approached this Court challenging the rejection. The election notified to be held on 20.11.1999 got postponed. Ultimately it is seen that the election was actually held on 3.1.2000 after this Curt disposed of the Original Petitions challenging the rejection of nomination of certain candidates. The results of the election were declared on 3.1.2000 itself. It is stated that the Managing Committee was constituted on 18.4.2000 in terms of Rule 38 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, hereinafter referred to as the Rules. Section 2 (e) of the Act indicates that it is the committee to which the management of the apex society is entrusted. It is to this duly elected managing committee that the Government in exercise of its power under Section 31 of the Act nominated three members. It is seen that the Government have subscribed to the share capital of the apex society and have also guaranteed the repayment of loans taken by the apex society and hence is entitled in terms of Section 31 of the Act to nominate not more than three members or one third of the total number of members of the committee of the apex society. Thus the nomination of the three members in exercise of power under Section 31 of the Act by Ext. P3 order cannot be called in question. It was also not called in question on behalf of the petitioner at the time of the final arguments in the Original Petition.
(3.) As noticed already, the election to the Managing Committee f the apex society was notified on 15.10.1999. Though Section 28-A (1) of the Act as it stood as on that date provided for reservation of one seat for a woman member and one seat for a member belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes in so far as they related to the committee of every primary credit society, every District Co-operative Bank, Kerala State Co-operative Bank Ltd., and the Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd., that rule of reservation was not applicable to an apex society like the one involved in this case. Therefore while passing the resolution for holding the election in terms of Rules 35 (1) of the Rules, it was not provided for any reservation of seats to woman and Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes. Due to one reason or other, the election was not held on 20.11.1999, the notified dated as contemplated by the resolution and notification dated 15.10.1999. The election was held only on 3.1.2000. Meanwhile the Act was amended by Act 1 of 2000 and Section 28-A (1) as it stood was replaced by the provision which made the rule of reservation of one seat each to women and a member of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes was made applicable in respect of election to the Managing Committee of an apex society as well. In other words as apex Society was also brought into purview of the rule of reservation. This meant that to any election that was to be held to the managing committee of an apex society after 1.1.2000, one seat had to be reserved for a woman and one seat had to be reserved for a member belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes. To cover cases of societies where managing committees existed but which did not have a woman member or a member belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes, a provisions was made by 1 of 2000 in Section 28-A (3) of the Act. By that provision, it was provided that in cases where there was no reservation for women or for a member belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes in the committee of any apex society at the commencement of Act 1 of 2000, the Government may nominate a woman member or a member belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes to the committee. Here the election was actually held on 3.1.2000. But since that election was held on the resolution taken prior to the amending Act 1 of 2000 and pursuant to the election notification dated. 15.10.1999, there was no reservation of a seat for a woman or a member belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes in the present apex society. Assuming the power available under Section 28-A (3) of the Act as amended by Act 1 of 2000, the Government nominated a woman member and a member belonging to the Scheduled Castes to the managing committee of the apex society by the very same order dated 5.1.2000 by which it nominated its nominees under Section 31 of the Act. What is involved in this Original Petition is the entitlement of the Government to make the nomination under Section 28-A (3) of the Act in this case where the election was actually held on 3.1.2000, after the coming into force of Act 1 of 2000 and based on a resolution and an election notification issued prior to the coming into force of Act I 2000 and without providing for the reservation of two seats in the managing committee of the apex society.