USANNA Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF EXCISE MAHABOOBNAGAR DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are the members of the Toddy Tappers Co-operative Society, Utkoor, which was formed in the year 1978. The Society was duly registered under the Andhra Pradesh Co operative Societies Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on 8th September, 1978. According to the petitioners a meeting of the general body was held on 5th September, 1978 and 9 persons including the petitioners and respondents 2 to 4 were elected unanimously as members of the Board of Directors. On 8th Septemoer, 1978 respondents 2 and 4 were elected as the President and Treasurer respectively, whereas the first petitioner was elected as the Vice President of the Society. Oa an application made by the Society, the liceace of the Toddy shop at Utkoor was granted to the Society for the excise year 1978-79. The Board of Directors of which the petitioners were members have been managing the affairs of the Society. While so, the Excise Superintendent, Mababoobnagar District, the first respondent herein to whom the powers of the Registrar under the Co-operative Societies Act are delegated, issued proceedings in Re. No. 3962 of 1979 dated 16th August, 1979 appointing respondents ?, 3 and 4 as persons- in-charge for a period of 3 months from the date of taking over charge. The said order was issued exercising the powers under section 32 (7) (a) of the Act.

(2.) Subsequently, by proceedings dated 31st August, 1979, the first respondent modifi d the order dated 16th August, 1979 and appointed respondents 2 to 6 as persons-in- charge. It is the validity of the orders dated 16th August, 1979 of the first respondent that is assailed in the present writ petition.

(3.) In the couater-affidavit filed on behalf of the first respondent, it is stated that the Toddy Tappers Co-operative Society, Utkoor came into effect from 8th September, 1978 and elections are to be conducted after its registration as per section 31 (a) of the Act. Till the regular elections, are conducted the persons who bave signed the application for registration may appoint a Cormmittes to conduct the affairs of the Society for a period of - months from the date of registration In the meeting of the General Body held on 5th September, 1978, a Committee consisting of 9 persons including the petitioners was appointed and that their term of office was only for 3 months. The licence for the year 1978-79 was granted in September, 1973 to the Society in the name of the President of the Committee, which was appointed on 5th September, 1978 whose term was only for 3 months. It was the duty of the Committee to call for a general body meeting within three months and conduct regular elections. But the Committee continued without conducting the elections. The Committee elected on 5th September, 1978, has no legal status after the expiry of 3 months. It was not a regular Committee appointed in accordance with the procedure contemplated by the bye-laws relating to the election of the Committee. Further, it is also stated that as per by law No 6 of the registered bye-laws of the society the persons who are eligible as per by law No. 4 and section 19 of the Act can enjoy the rights as members of the Society only after remitting the share capital in the District Cooperative Central Bink on 8th September, 1979, and therefore, the members of the Society can enjoy the rights only after 8th September, 1979, and that the meeting held on 5th September, 1978 was only to elect an ad hoc Committee which can be in office for a period of 3 months. As the said Committee ceased to be a Committee after the expiry of 3 months, which ended by 7th December, 1978, there was no valid Committee to manage the affairs of Society beyond 7th December, 1978. When this fact came to the notice of the 1st respondent and as it was not possible to conduct the elections due to some administrative reasons, the respondent No. 1 appointed a Committee consisting of 3 members under section 32 (7) (a) of the Act for period of 3 months from the date of assumption of chargs, that evenbefore the said persons have assumed the charge, the first respondent had modified the order dated 16th August, 1979 by including respondents 5 and 6 also as psrsons- in-charge by order dated 31st August, 1979.