Committee of Management and Another vs State of Uttaranchal and Another

P.C. Pant, J.—All these writ petitions have been moved under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to hold the elections of Members of Committee of Management and that of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Co-operative Banks within the time stipulated by the Court. It is further prayed in the Writ Petitions No. 353 & 354 both of the year 2002 that the provisions of Section 29(5) of U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 be declared ultra vires.

Petitions are aggrieved against the inaction on the part of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Uttaranchal for not holding the elections of the Co-operative Societies and preferring to appoint Administrators to run the Management of the Co-operative Societies. In all these writ petitions, facts are almost similar. The petitioners District Co-operative Banks are the Central Co-operative Societies and all the Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Societies as well as few other Societies of the districts constitute the Electoral College for the Committee of Management of the District Co-operative Banks. One of the Petitioners, in all the cases is the Chairman of the respective Banks. In view of provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 29 of the U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 (from hereinafter referred to as the ''Act''), it is the duty of the Committee of Management to take the steps before the expiry of its terms to move for fresh elections so that then elected body may replace them. The election of the Committee of Management of a District Co-operative Bank cannot be held unless the Registrar notifies the dates of elections and the Election Officer is appointed by the District Magistrate as per the provisions of Rule 439 (2) of the U.P Co-operative Societies Rule, 1968. The last elections were held in the year 1999 and the term of the Committee of Management of the Primary Co-operative Societies in the State of Uttaranchal has expired on 6.3.2002 and the that of term of Committee of Management on 6.7.2002. Rule 407 of U.P. Co-operative Societies Rule, 1968 casts duty on the Registrar to reconstitute new Committee of Management in accordance with the provisions of the Act and Rules before the expiry of the term of the elected Committee of Management of a Co-operative Society. The Registrar (respondent No. 2) has failed to discharge this legal obligation. Instead, the Registrar, by exercising powers u/s 29(5) of the Act, has appointed the Administrator in the Primary Societies, and not notified the scheme of election. The Committee of Management, on their party, vide their Resolution No. 26, dated 2.4.2002 (Annexure 3 in Writ Petition No. 354 of 2002); Resolution No. 15(5), dated 8.4.2002 (Annexure 3 in Writ Petition No. 353 of 2002) and letter dated 12.2.2002 (Annexure 3 in Writ Petition No. 352 of 2002), urged the Registrar, Co-operative Societies to hold the elections. However, respondent No. 2 (The Registrar) has not acted upon it. Therefore, these writ petitions have been filed.

On behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2, counter affidavits have been filed in the writ petitions mentioned above and the stand taken in all the counter affidavits is almost the same. In the counter affidavits of the respondents, it has been stated that the elections of the Committees of Management of District Co-operative Banks were held in the month of July, 1999 and they have completed their tenure on 5th July, 2002. Since, the State Uttaranchal is newly created State and Government of the State changed within a period of 2 years, delimitations of Gram Panchayat within the State of Uttaranchal were in the progress, as such election process could not be completed. Also, the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Uttaranchal could not declare the elections of Primary Credit Co-operative Societies on account of non-availability of requisite staff to hold the elections. The staff of Vikas Vibhag was also engaged in recovery of Co-operative dues and also in purchase of Wheat under the Government Price Support Scheme. Therefore, the Registrar was compelled to appoint Administrator for Management of the affairs of the Primary Credit Co-operative Societies. The order dated 6.7.2002 of the appointment of Administrator is annexed as Annexure CA-1 to the counter affidavits. The District Magistrates were appointed as Administrators u/s 29(5) of the Act. It is further stated in the counter affidavits that the Chairman of the District Co-operative Banks are no more entitled to continue as ''Adhyaksh'' of the Committee. The contention of the petitioners regarding constitutionality of sub-section (5) of Section 29 of the Act is misconceived as it provides only interim measures till the new elections are held, as such, cannot be said to be ultra vires. The appointment of Administrator is perfectly in accordance with law and provisions of the Constitution. The Registrar of the Co-operative Societies (respondent No. 2) has not misused his powers as alleged in the writ petitions as the reasons for not holding the elections were beyond the control of the Registrar.

We have heard Mr. Paresh Tripathi, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. K.P. Upadhyaya, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

As to the constitutionality of the provisions contained in sub-section (5) of Section 29 of the Act is concerned, Counsel for the petitioners has conceded the validity of the provisions and given up the plea raised in the writ petitions in this regard. However, the delay in holding the elections has been vehemently challenged by the petitioners.

The exercise of the civic right and to have a say in the affairs of the Co-operative Societies through democratically elected representatives is an important right of citizens. Civic sense is the first principle, which makes a citizen to act with orderliness. Young citizens are taught in the schools subject called ''Civics'' in their course, which speaks of the Parliament, the State Legislature and Civic Bodies. In view of Explanation (c) in Section 4 of the Act, the Co-operative Societies also have the same concept. As such, withholding of elections in any institution defeats the noble purpose of its creation. So long as the delay in holding the elections is beyond the control of the Authority having responsibility of conducting the elections, sub-section (5) of Section 29 of the Act has an object to that extent. But under the grab of said sub-section, the Co-operative Societies cannot be kept un-represented for an indefinite period. Since year 2002, now almost 2 years have passed and the Registrar, Co-operative Societies has still not been able to hold elections required under the Statute. Such a delay Cannot be said to have been explained by merely stating in the counter affidavit that due to the change in Government, the elections could not be held in time. It appears that after the appointment of the Administrators, the Registrar, Co-operative Society is totally ignoring the sub-section (7) of Section 29 of the Act, which reads as under :

"7. The Administrator or the Committee, as the case may be, appointed under sub-section (5), shall as soon as may be, but not later than the expiry of one year from the date of appointment, arrange for the reconstitution of the Committee of Management in accordance with the provisions of the Act, the Rules and the bye-laws of the Society to take over the Management of the Society from the Administrator or the Committee, as the case may be :

Provided that where an Administrator is replaced by a Committee or a Committee by an Administrator as provided in clause (b) of sub-section (5), the period of one year shall count from the date the Administrator or the Committee, as the case may be, was originally appointed."

In view of the above provisions, of law, we are of the view that the respondents have failed, rather negligently withheld "democratic constitution of the Societies". Therefore, we direct the Registrar, Co-operative Societies and Government of Uttaranchal to hold and complete the election process of all the Co-operative Societies within Uttaranchal within a period of four months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed for the mandamus to hold the deletions as above. However, as to the constitutionality of Section 29(5) of the U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965, the writ petitions are dismissed. No order as to costs.