BABU Vs. JOINT REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the President of the third respondent cooperative society. He is aggrieved by Ext. P8 nomination made by the first respondent Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Idukki nominating the 4th respondent to the Board of Directors of the third respondent society. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the 4th respondent is not qualified to be elected to the Board of Directors of the third respondent society for the reason that as per Clause.30 of the bye laws governing the affairs of the society, a person should put in a minimum period of two years as a member before he can become eligible to be a member of the Board of Directors of the society. I am afraid, I cannot accede to the contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner for more than one reason. The first reason is that under S.28A sub clause 3(ii) the Registrar is vested with power to nominate a woman member or a member belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes to the committee of such Bank or society, if necessary, by increasing the total number of members of such committee by two more members. On a perusal of the said section, I do not find any fetter imposed on the power of the Registrar to make nomination to the Board of Directors of a cooperative society. So long as there is no fetter in the Act, a fetter cannot be introduced by the bye laws. The bye laws have no force of law and, at any rate, it cannot override the provisions of the Act or Rules. The next reason is that even the bye laws does not stipulate the minimum period of two years in order to become eligible for being nominated to the Board of Directors of a society. Clause.30(i) of the bye laws stipulates the condition regarding membership of at least two years prior to the date of election only in the case of election of a shareholder member and it has nothing to do with nomination, which according to me, is a statutory power vested exclusively on the Registrar.

(2.) In the above view of the matter, I do not find any infirmity in Ext. P8 order passed by the first respondent Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies and the Original Petition is only to be dismissed which is accordingly dismissed.