YEWANTABAI ALIAS TANSEN PATLE Vs. DISTRICT DEPUTY REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Short ques-tion raised by Shri S.S. Ghate, learned Coun-sel for petitioners in this petition is -Whether because of proviso to section 73-BBB(2) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 the number of seats reserved for women on Board of Directors of respondent No. 3 Society has to be 2 or then because of re-quirement of explanation to sub-section (1) thereof, it can be only 1.

(2.) Considering the nature of the contro-versy and by consent of Shri S.S. Ghate, learned Counsel for petitioners, Shri Kankale, learned A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Shri S.Y. Deopujari, learned Counsel for respondent No. 3, the matter is heard finally at the stage of admission by making Rule returnable forthwith.

(3.) Reliance is being placed on the judg-ment of Division Bench of this Court in the case of Saralabai Arjun Bajaj and others Vs. State of Maharashtra, 1993 2 MhLJ 1127 to urge that provisions of section 73BBB are mandatory and not providing reservation accordingly on Board of Directors, vitiates the entire elec-tion. Attention is invited to the election pro-gram as published on 12.2.2010 to show that though total number of Directors in it is 13 and one post is reserved for women, it is not in accordance with section 73BBB and two seats need to be reserved for women Direc-tors. It is pointed out that in Bye law No. 9 of respondent No. 3 Society, there exist a pro-vision for 1 woman representative and hence because of the proviso to sub-section (2) of section 73BBB the explanation to sub-sec-tion (1) thereof is not attracted.