PANDURANG SHENPHADU PAWAR Vs. LAXMAN BHAGAJI BHISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. With the consent of the parties matter taken up for consideration. Heard the parties at length. Besides other questions, the important question which has been raised for consideration in this writ petition is whether the ex-officio members referred in section 112-A (1) (b) (ii), (iii) and (iv) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, (for short the Act), are entitled to vote at the meeting called for the purposes of passing no confidence motion under section 73-ID of the Act against respondent No. I, the Chairman of the loan committee of the respondent No. 9-Bank. Whereas the petitioner has stoutly discounted this suggestion, the respondents more particularly respondent No. 1, has tried to support the proposition that the ex-officio members referred above are entitled to vote at the said meeting and that the no confidence motion can be said to have been passed if only 2/3 number of members, entitled to sit and vote at the said meeting, have cast their votes in favour of the no confidence motion.

(2.) IN order to appreciate these rival contentions, it would not be out of place to state briefly the facts set out in the petition. The petitioner is one of the members of the loan committee of respondent No. 9 -. The Maharashtra State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd. The respondents Nos. 1 to 6 are the elected members of the District Loan Committee of respondent No. 9 Bank, branch Aurangabad. The said loan committee is constituted under the above provisions of section 112 of the Act.

(3.) THE said committee consists of three types of members and they are 7 elected members, 2 nominated members under section 112-A (l) (b) (i-