SEETHAPATHI NAGESWARA RAO Vs. GOVT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this batch of writ petitions, the constitutional validity of S. 15-A of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, as inserted by Act 6 of 1977, is questioned on the ground that the said section is ultra virus Arts. 14, 19 and 31 of the Constitution of India. As the question involved is common to all the petitions, we may refer to the facts stated by the petitioners in W. P. Nos. 1892, 1929, 1732, 2025 and 2316 of 1977.

(2.) In W. P. No. 1892 of 1977, the petitioner is Sri Chodeswaraswami Co-operative Credit Society, Sanipalli lanka in Amalapuram taluk, East Godavari district, represented by its President, Bobba Janakiramiah. The respondents are (1) Government of Andhra Paradesh, represented by its Secretary, Food and Agriculture Department (2) The District Collector, East Godavari District and (3) the Divisional Co-Operative Officer, Amalapuram, East Godavari district. The petitioner-society was registered in the year 1946 and the area of operation of the society is Sanapalli lanka village and its hamlet Moolapalem. The population of the said village is about 6,500. The Ayacut of the village is about 2,096 acres. The society consists of 250 members. The sanctioned limit of the credit which the society can disburse to its members is Rs. 2,22,708. By the end of June, 1977, the society was in a position to extend credit facilities, to its members in about Rs. 1,24,000. The credit facilities provided by the society to its members so far came to Rs. 1,00,000. The Andhra Pradesh Legislature enacted Act 6 of 1977 substituting the impugned S. 15-A of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Invoking the powers under S. 15-A conferred upon the Registrar, the Divisional Co-operative Officer (3rd respondent) issued a notice to the petitioner-society dated 17-5-1977 proposing the merger of Nondukudur Co-operative Credit Society in the petitioner-Society and called for objections or suggestions, if any, within seven days from the date of receipt of the notice. The petitioner-society submitted a reply dated 22-5-1977 to the 3rd respondent stating that it would not be in the interests of the petitioner-society, which is a viable one, to merge it with the Kondukudur society. Ignoring the objections raised by the petitioner-society, the 3rd respondent directed the merger of the petitioner-society with the Kondukudur society and the same was published in the District Gazette of East Godavari dated 30-5-1977. The petitioner then submitted a representation to the Collector, East Godavari, protesting against the said merger with no result. According to the petitioner, the provisions of S. 15-A and G.O.Ms. No. 45, Food and Agriculture (Co-op. IV) Department dated 25-1-1977 and G.O.Ms. No. 155, Food and Agriculture (Co-op. IV) Department dated 11-3-1977 confer arbitrary powers on the Registrar i.e., the 3rd respondent and are ultra virus the provisions of Arts. 14 and 19 of the Constitution.

(3.) W. P. No. 1929 of 1977 is filed by the President, Muramanda Co-operative Rural Bank Ltd., and the Directors of the Rural Bank. Their case is that they were elected to the managing Committee at a General Body meeting of the Bank convened for the purpose of electing the Managing Committee of the said bank for the period 11-6-75 to 10-6-1978 and were managing the affairs of the bank since then. There are no complaints against the management and as such they are entitled to continue as members of the managing Committee till 10-6-1978. The third respondent, in exercise of his powers conferred upon him under S. 15-A (2) of the Act, issued proceedings dated 24-5-77 declaring the petitioner-bank as a viable bank. According to them the mere declaration that the bank is viable society under S. 15-A of the Act does not vest the 3rd respondent with the jurisdiction to appoint a person-in-charge to manage the affairs of the bank. By such a declaration, the managing committee of the bank ceases to exist only when some other known viable society for bank is merged or amalgamated with the bank. The official notification published by the 3rd respondent in the District Gazette, Special Supplement, dated 27th May, 1977, indicates that no other society was merged with the petitioner-bank. The third respondent appointed the 4th respondent as the person-in-charge to manage the affairs of the bank and it is said that the person-in-charge has assumed charge on 8-6-1977, the date on which this Court granted stay of the operation of the order dated 4-5-1977 superseding the Managing Committee.