RAM SWAROOP PATHAK Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner, who is the President of Gramin Vidyut Sahakari Samiti Maryadit, Laundi, District Chhatarpur (hereinafter called (he. 'Society'), has challenged the order dated 1-6-1995 (Annexure-P/10) of Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Chhatarpur, passed under S.49(8)(ii) of the M.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (for short the 'Act'), removing the Managing Committee of Society and authorising the respondent to assume office and manage the affairs of the society till fresh elections are held in accordance with law.

(2.) Facts giving rise to this petition are these :The society is a registered co-operative society under the Act having its object to supply electrical energy which it gets from the M.P. Electricity Board at the rate of 10 Naya Paise per unit, which in turn society supplies to nearly about 15000 consumers at the rate of 65 Naya Paise per unit, the area of supply of electricity by the society extends to about 312 villages of the District Chhatarpur. The last election of the members of the Managing Committee was held on 25-4-1987 for a term of 5 years, but, by Amendment Act No.14 of 1990 in the Act the period was curtailed to 3 years, as a result of which the Managing Committee was superseded. The petitioner and other various societies in the State of M.P. challenged the said provisions as being ultra vires by writ petitions, the petitioner's writ petition was M.P. No.376 of 1991 (Ram Swaroop Pathak v. State of M.P.). A Division Bench of this Court by a common judgment passed in M.P. No. 1111/90 (Anrudh Prasad Shastri v. The State of M.P.) decided on 21-6-1993 (reported in 1993 (2) MPJR 33), disposed of all the writ petitions, wherein this Court held that the provision of S.49(8) as amended curtailing the period of term of office from 5 years to three years is arbitrary and violative of Art.14 of the Constitution of India as there is no nexus between the provision and the object sought to be achieved by it, which is clear from the statement of objects and reasons, is to promote democratic functioning of the society, which can only be done by holding fresh elections, but, the amendment gives a premium on the defaults of the Registrar in holding the fresh elections within the time frame. As a result of this decision, the Court observed that the members of the earlier Managing Committee of the petitioner's society will be deemed to continue legally and validly in the office till the elections are held in accordance with law. As the petitioners were removed from the office because of the amendment in S.49(8) the members of the committee vide memo dated 23-6-1993 (Annexure-P/3) of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies were placed in the office till the expiry of the term of their office, that is up to 21-3-1995. After the judgment in Anurudh Prasad Shastri, 1993 (2) MPJR 33 (supra) sub-sec. (8) of S.49 was amended by the Amending Act No. 12/94. According to amended provisions of sub-sec. (8) of S.49 the Managing Committee in terms of cl.(i) of sub-sec. (8) of S.49 was to apply to the Registrar for holding elections within reasonable time in no case less than 90 days before expiration of the term of the committee. Admittedly neither committee passed a resolution to hold elections nor applied to Registrar in accordance with clause (i) of sub-sec. (8) of S. 49.

(3.) The case of the petitioner is that the Assistant Registrar vide Annexure-P/5 dated 20-12-1994 received on 23-12-1994 communicated the petitioner the decision of starting the election process to hold election of the committee in the first week of January, 1995 and, for that the petitioner was asked to submit, by 30th December 1994, the list of members of the society in 6 copies, in the pro forma given in the letter. The petitioner vide letter dated 30-12-1994 (Annexure-P/6) requested the Registrar to appoint a Returning Officer for holding the elections of the members of the committee in accordance with bye-law No.24(b) of the Society and for that the petitioner vide letter dated 6-1-1995 (Annexure-P/7) sent the list of membership in 6 copies in response to the letter (An-nexure-P/4), but, instead of appointing Returning Officer for holding elections the Assistant Registrar served a show cause notice dated 3-2-1995 (Annexure-P/8) under S.69(3) of the Act for liquidation of the society for the lapses committed by it in particular consistent losses incurred till 1992-93 to the extent of Rs. 95-96 lacs. The petitioner for showing cause against the notice vide Annexure-P/9 demanded the copies of documents on which the charges were based, but, the copies of the documents were not supplied, hence the petitioner filed an appeal under S.77 of the Act against the said show cause notice before the Joint Registrar, which is pending for its final decision.