K. Anjaneyulu vs Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies and Another

B. Subhashan Reddy, J.—This is a writ petition questioning the impugned order which was passed by the first respondent herein, purporting to exercise his power u/s 21-A(1)(b) of the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 read with Rule 24(1)(b) of A.P. Co-operative Societies Rules, on the ground that the petitioner who is presently elected as the President of Yellampally Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society was in default of payment of money on the date of filing of the nomination and thus incurred disqualification for Membership of Society and ultimately the Presidentship also.

It is stated that the petitioner had availed the loan facility from the erstwhile Primary Agricultural Development Bank, Kadiri, and that the same was merged with Anantapur District Co-operative Central Bank Limited. The entire loan was not remitted back by the petitioner and there was balance payable, but the petitioner states that he was under the bonafide impression that the same was waived under the Loan Waiver Scheme. But, when he came to know about the fact that the same was not waived under the Loan Waiver Scheme, he remitted the balance of amount on 25-1-1992 to the credit of the Society in question and the said remittance is not in dispute.

The contention raised both by the first respondent as also the impleaded respondent is that as the petitioner was in default on the date of his filing nomination for the post of President of the Society, he was disqualified as on that date and that consequently, his election also stands cancelled automatically. Mr. C. Sadasiva Reddy, the learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that inasmuch as no objections were raised during the scrutiny of nominations and as there was also no due certificate issued and as he was duly declared to have been elected and as the same was not challenged before the Election Tribunal as contemplated under the statute, the said election has become final and that the same cannot be annulled under the guise of declaring the petitioner as a defaulter as on 25-1-1992.

The contentions of Mr. Ghulam Mohammad, the Assistant Government Pleader, appearing for the first respondent and Mr. O. Manohar Reddy, the counsel appearing for the second respondent, are otherwise. They contend that the petitioner was not entitled to contest as he was in default and as he was not entitled to file nomination at all and even though election petition was not filed, the impugned proceedings are sustainable.

Mr. O. Manohar Reddy, the learned counsel for the second respondent, has cited the decisions reported in Pratap Reddy v. Government of A.P. 1971 (2) :An.W.R. 148 (2). and K. Rajendran v. Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Chittoor and Anr.1982 (2) ALT 61 .

In Pratap Reddy v. Government of A.P. (1 supra) the proposition laid down was that a person who is in default in payment of money to the Society of whose committee he is a member for such period as is specified in the bye-laws of the Society or for a period exceeding three months, is disqualified for election as or for being a member of the committee of any society and that the said person ceases to be a member from the date of disqualification and that disqualification is co-terminus with the term of the committee and cannot go beyond the period of the said committee. The said Judgment do not help the respondents, as the facts are different in the instant case.

In so far as the judgment reported in K. Rajendran v. The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies (2 supra) is concerned, the same holds that if the time for payment did not expire, the disqualification do not occur. But, disqulification comes in when the time specified expires and if the person is defaulter on the date of filing of the nomination, he will be disqualified to contest the election. The same is also not helpful to the respondents as the facts in the instant case are totally different.

Here, is a case where the default was to the earlier society which was held to be non-viable and the said society had become non-existent as the same was merged with another society and No due certificate'' was given to the petitioner and on the strength of the same, his nomination was found to be in order and the same was also not questioned by anybody and when he knew that he is liable to pay the amount, he promptly paid the same on 25-1-1992, while he was elected as President on 29-1-1992, and in any event on the date of passing of the impugned order, the petitioner was not in default of any amounts. A reading of Section 21-A(1)(b) of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, as also Rule 24(1)(b) of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Rules, makes it explicit that the member should be in default as on the date of passing of the said order and as the petitioner was not in arrears as on the date of passing of the order, the same cannot relate back to 25-1-1992. The Section as also Rule make it abundantly clear that when the concerned Officer takes up the matter for consideration, the default should be subsisting as on that date as otherwise, the officer concerned gets no jurisdiction to adjudicate with regard to default which does not exist as on the date. That is the only harmonious interpretation and construction of the statutory provisions concerned here or otherwise giving unfettered right to the executive to dwell on the subject of disqualification even though the same is not existing on the date of its decision or at least initiation of proceedings will lead to absurdity resulting in anomalies.

In the circumstances, the impugned order is set-aside and the writ petition is allowed. No costs.