A R RAMTAKE Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Grih Nirman Sahkari Sanstha Maryadit, Bhilai Nagar, is a Co-operative Society duly registered under the Co-operative Societies Act. At the relevant time, the petitioner No 1 was elected as a member of the Board of Directors of the Society. During the process of Co-option, in accordance with rules, respondent No. 6 was co-opted as one of the Directors on 8-11-1989. He was then co-opted as the President of the Society. The petitioners seek to challenge the Co -option as also the election of respondent No. 6 as President of the Society. It may be mentioned that the petitioner No. 2 is a member of that Society.

(2.) Before we deal with the question raised in this petition a few more facts may be stated. By an order dated 29-4-1987 (Annexure P-1), the then Board of Directors, including respondent No. 6 as its member, was superseded. The respondent No. 6 was declared disqualified to contest the election of the Board of Directors for a period of seven years. That order is in force and has become final. The disqualification, therefore, continues to be attached to respondent No. 6. When the Board of Directors was reconstituted and petitioner No. 1 was co-opted as a Director and subsequently elected as President of the Society, his option and election as the President were challenged the Deputy Registrar Co-operative Societies, Durg, vide order dated 14-3-1990 set aside the co-option and also declared respondent No. 6 as disqualified to contest the election to the office of the Board of Directors for a period of Seven years. The order is Annexure P-3A. In appeal, the same was upheld vide Annexure P-4 by the joint Registrar (respondent No. 3). Respondent No. 6 however, preferred an appeal before the Board of Revenue which allowed the same and set aside the orders (Annexures P-3A and P-4). The co-option of respondent No. 6 as a member of the Board of Directors and his election as President of the Society were upheld by the Board of Revenue, vide order (Annexure P-5). It is this order of the Board of Revenue which is challenged in this petition, which is also said to have the colour of public interest litigation.

(3.) At the time of hearing of this petition, Counsel for the petitioners informed the court through an application that on 18-1-1991, a notice was issued to the existing body of the Board of Directors to show cause as to why the same be not suspended and on 19-3-1991 the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, has directed suspension of the Board of Directors, including the President, pending action for supersession of the Board of Directors. An officer-in-charge has been appointed to look after the functioning of the Board of Directors pending those proceedings. The document is Annexure P-13. This position has not been controverted by the counsel for the opposite party,