TRUSHIT INDRAVADAN CHOKSI Vs. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the Requisition issued by the Reserve Bank of India dated 30.3.2012 whereby in exercise of powers conferred upon it under Section 115-A (3) of the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, 1961, directed the Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Gujarat State, to supersede the Board of Directors of Bhuj Mercantile Cooperative Bank Limited. The petitioners have sought the following reliefs:

(2.) BRIEF facts of the present case are that the petitioners are the Directors of the Bhuj Mercantile Cooperative Bank Limited ( BMCBL for short) and the BMCBL was functioning well and was given audit classification 'A and was making profits, the respondent No.1 RBI exercised its powers under Section 115A(3) of the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, 1961 ( the Act for short) and issued the Requisition dated 30.3.2012 to the respondent No.3 Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Gujarat State, requiring him to pass an order for supersession of the Board of Directors of the BMCBL. It is the case of the petitioners that the said requisition was made in violation of the principle of natural justice and without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The respondent No.3 vide its order dated 30.3.2012 appointed the Administrator of the BMCBL. It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent No.1 had passed the order with mala fide intention so as to victimize the petitioners on account of the personality clash between the earlier Board and Officers of the Respondent No.1 RBI. The petitioners, in support of their case, relied upon a decision of this Court in the case of Aabedinbhai S. Baldiwala and Ors. vs. Registrar, Cooperative Societies and Ors., as reported in 2010 (3) GLR 2349 and submitted that the principles of natural justice are inbuilt in Section 115A(2) and (3) of the Act.

(3.) IT appears from the record that the petitioners filed a Revision No. 77 of 2012 before the Deputy Secretary (Agriculture and Cooperative Department) challenging the order of the respondent No. 3 dated 30.3.2012 appointing the Administrator on the basis of the Requisition of the RBI. The Deputy Secretary (Agriculture and Cooperative Department) passed an order on 10.4.2012 by which an ex parte stay of the order of the respondent No. 3 dated 30.3.2012 was granted. It is pertinent to mention that in the said Revision Application, the RBI was not joined as a party by the petitioners and, therefore, RBI filed a writ petition before this Cort being Special Civil Application No. 4913 of 2012 challenging the order 10.4.2012 passed by the Deputy Secretary in Revision No. 77 of 2012. This Court (Coram: Hon ble Mr. Justice K.M. Thaker) was passed an ad interim order on 13.4.2012 staying the order of the Deputy Secretary. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioners filed the present writ petition, praying certain reliefs , as mentioned here-in-before.