GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. SETHURAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this Writ Appeal there is no dispute about facts. The only question that arises for consideration is whether a person or persons appointed by the Registrar to manage the affairs of the Society in exercise of the powers conferred upon him under Section 32 (7) (a) of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 7 of 1964, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act', is a Committee within the meaning of Section 21-C. A Full Bench of this Court in Kamareddy Suryanarayana vs. District Co-operative Officer while interpreting the word ''Committee" in Section 21-C held as follows: "........They must have meant it to be both an elected committee and a nominated committee." The learned Judges have considered the objects and reasons for enacting Section 21-C and uitimately came to the above said conclusion. It is no doubt true that while coming to the said conclusion, the learned Judges were concerned with a committee nominated under the second proviso to Section 31 of the Act.

(2.) In the instant case, certain persons were appointed by the Registrar under Section 32 (7) (a) to manage the affairs of the Society. It is contended by the learned Government Pleader that there is no difference or Distinction between a committee nominated under Section 31 Second Proviso, and a person or persons appointed under Section 32 (1) (a) by the Registrar to manage the affairs of the Society. In this connection, the learned Government Pleader has drawn our attention to the definition of the word 'Committee', which reads as follows:

(3.) Dealing with the decision in Usanna v. Superintendent of Excise the learned Judge observed as follows :