M K ABDUL SALAM Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) "If you want to be incrementally better: Be competitive. If you want to be exponentially better: Be co-operative." said an unknown author whose message is yet to percolate to the masses.

(2.) The challenge in these writ appeals is confined to Section 2(ia), the third proviso to Section 18(1) and Explanation I to Section 32(1) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' only). The above provisions brought in by the Kerala Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Amending Act') are extracted below for the sake of clarity:

(3.) The appellants contend that Primary Agricultural Credit Societies and Urban Co-operative Banks have the right to vote as members in the District Co-operative Bank as per Section 2(ia) of the Act. Other co-operative societies registered under the Act can only be admitted as nominal or associate members to the District Co-operative Bank without any right to vote as per the third proviso to Section 18(1) of the Act. The appellants urge that the right to be members of the District Co-operative Bank without any right to vote violates Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India. The same also militates against the Co-operative Principles - particularly Democratic Member Control - enunciated in Schedule II formulated under Section 2(eccc) of the Act. The appellants further point out that Explanation I has been added after the third proviso to Section 32(1) of the Act to rope in many Boards and Corporations having little governmental control. Explanation I facilitates the Government to topple down democratically elected committee to the societies by supersession for the slightest displeasure. This according to the appellants will not be in the best interest of a society which is bound to function as a democratic institution and conduct its affairs based on democratic principles. The Government points out that the courts should be slow to interfere with the legislative wisdom and that there is always a presumption in favour of constitutionality unless established otherwise.