AJAY SINGH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall govern the disposal of M. P. No. 1420 of 1993 Kishan Singh v. State of M. P. and others), M P. No. 1419 of 93 (Shriram v. State of M. P.). M P, No. 1376 of 93 (Ramsingh v State of M. P. and others) M. P. No. 1393 of 93 (Kanhaiyalal v State of M. P. and others), M. P. No. 1476 of 93 (Ashok v. State of M. P. and others). M P. No. 1442 of 93 (Radheshyam v. State of M P and others), M. P No 1611 of 93 (Satish Chandra v State of M. P and others), M P No. 1554 of 9. (Shailesh v. state of M. P and others), M. P No. 1482 of 93 (Radheshyam S/o Narhari v Stale of M. P. and others), and M P No. 1615 of 93(Kanhaiyalal S/o Bheklalji v. State of M. P. and another ), tiled by various petitioners challenging the order of the Commissioner and Registrar, Co-operative Societies dated 23 6.1995, bearing No. Samanya/l/42 issued to all the District Collectors, Joint. Deputy and Assistant Registrars of Co-operative Societies M. P. issued in consequence of the order of this Court at Jabalpur Bench in M. P. No. 1111 of 199O (Anirudh Prasad Shastri and another v. State of M. P. and others), dated 21 6 1993, whereby a direction has been issued that all those Board of Directors from whom charges were taken in pursuance to Section 49 (8) of the M. P. Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter called the Act) in pursuance to the amendment in the aforesaid section by Amending Act No. 14 of 1990, be given back the charges of the respective societies.

(2.) According to the present petitioner and other petitioners in the other petitions, it has been stated that the Act came into existence in the year 1960 and since then various amendments were made in it, the last amendment in the aforesaid Act was made by Amending Act No 14 of 90 whereby Sections 48 (4), 49 (7-A) (iii) and Section 49 (8) of the Act were amended. These amendments were challenged by various petitions before the High Court of M. P at Jabalpur Bench. The Jabalpur Bench of the M P. High Court deciding M. P. No. 1111 of 90 decided all the petitions, vide its order dated 216.1993. By this order the amendments made in the Act pertaining to Section 48 (4) and Section 49 (8) were declared ultra vires of the Constitution with the further direction that as a result of the aforesaid order Sections 48 (4) and 49 (8) as they stood before the amendment shall continue to be a part of the Act. A direction was also issued that the Board of Directors of the Societies who were removed from the post, shall be restored to their original position as a result of the decision in the petition.

(3.) The grievance of the petitioners is that the order in petition M. P. No 1111 of 1990 was specific in directing the State to hand over charge only to those Directors who were petitioners before the Court, but with an intention to extend the benefit illegally to the Board of Directors of the other Societies the impugned order has been passed. It has also been averred that the charge of the societies was taken from the earlier Board of Directors under Section 49 (7-A) (iii) of the Act on 28 4.90 and thereafter the charge of the Societies was with the Registrar of Co-perative Societies. Therefore, it is wrong to say that the charge was taken from the Societies under the provisions of Section 49 (8) of the Act. Therefore, the change could not be handed over to the Board of Directors of the Societies in pursuance of the judgment of the Jubalpur Bench in M P. No. 1111 of 1990- It has also been averred that while handing over the charge to the Board of Directors of the Societies the fact, that some of the Directors were disqualified was also not taken into consideration. Therefore, the impugned order Annexure. P-2 be quashed and the charge of the Societies be directed to be taken by the Registrar.