AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The Writ Petition was directed against the order dated 16.05.2014 passed by the Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Gwalior Division, Gwalior,
whereby in purported exercise of his power under Section 80A of M.P. Co-operative Societies Act 1960, the process of election of Board of
Directors, Primary Agriculture Credit Cooperative Society, Jigna, Datia, was held to be null and void.
Relevant facts giving rise to the controversy briefly are that the Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies received a complaint by one Keshav Yadav,
Member, Primary Agriculture Credit Society Jigna on 26.11.2013 that out of 11 seats of Directors 6 seats were unreserved. Out of reserved seats,
one was reserved for Nikshepkarta, three seats for the OBC, one seat each for SC and ST. That in terms of the stipulations under Section 53B of
1960 Act two seats were reserved for women out of which one was unreserved and the other was to be filled from the woman belonging to OBC
category. The allegations were that though the procedure required for publishing the ballot paper for woman candidate separately displaying total
number of seats to be filled up. But as one of the women candidates (respondent No.5 herein) was declared elected unopposed, it was essential to
have a ballot paper published in different colour. Instead, the name of male candidate was got displayed in the ballot paper, as a result whereof against
the post reserved for women candidate, a male member got elected. Thus, it was urged that illegal procedure was followed in the election.
Joint Registrar issued notice on 06.12.2013. After affording opportunity of hearing, he found that the General Body Meeting was not held in the office
and the proceedings were not recorded. And that the proceedings for election of woman candidate was not adhered to as a result whereof a male
candidate was elected. Joint Registrar in his order dated 16.05.2014 found:
^^¼4½ mijksDr lEiw.kZ fooj.k ds vk/kkj ij ;g LIk""V gS fd lapkyd ds fokZpu gsrq 3 in fiNM+k oxZ ds fy;s vkjf{kr gSa ftlesa ls efgyk oxZ ds
vkj{k.k ds nkSjku 1 in fiNM+k oxZ ls efgyk gsrq vkjf{kr gqvk FkkA fu;ekuqlkj eri= dh NikbZ ds nkSjku fiNM+k oxZ efgyk gsrq i`Fkd eri= Nik;s tkus
Fks ,oa vU; 2 lapkydks tks fuokZfpr gksus Fks ml eri= ls bu lapkydksa dk fuokZpu gksuk FkkA laLFkk bl vU; fiNMk oxZ eri= dk i`Fkd ls tkjh fd;k
tkuk Fkkeri= i`Fkd ls tkjh fd;k tkuk FkkA bl gsrq u flQZ fuokZpu vf/kdkjh oju lgk;d ita h;d nfr;k ds fuokZpu izfdz;k izHkkjh ,oa mudh Vhe mruh gh
nks""kh gSA tcfd fuokZpu izfdz;k ds izHkkjh }kjk mDr fuokZpu fujLr fd;k tkuk FkkA mijksDr egRoiw.kZ fcUnq dks laLFkk esa fuokZpu izfdz;k ds
fy;s eri= Niok;s ftlesa ls vf/kdre er ik;s tkus okys in efgyk dks fuokZfpr ?kksf""kr fd;k x;k tks fd laiw.kZ fiNMk oxZ dh fuokZpu izfdz;k ds dk;Z dks
nks""kh ugha cuk;k tkuk FkkA bl izdkj fiNMk oxZ ds fuokZpu gsrq fu/kkZfjr izfdz;k dh ntZ =qfViw.kZ izfdz;k ds vk/kkj ij bl izdj.k esa fuokZfpr rhuksa
lapkydksa ds fuokZpu dks vuqfpr ikrs gq;s u flQZ efgyk fiNMk oxZ ,oa 2 vU; fiNMk oxZ ds fuokZpu dks Hkh vfof/kd ?kksf""kr fd;k tkrk gSA ,oa
iSjk dzekad ¼3½ ds vuqlkj Jh lqDdh ;kno dks voS/kkfud :i ls fiNMk oxZ esa ntZ fd;s tkus ,oa lk/kkj.k lHkk dk fof/kor vk;kstu u djus ,oa fjdkMZ u
djus o is'k u djus ls laiw.kZ fuokZpu izfdz;k 'kwU; ?kksf""kr dh tkrh gSA rnuqlkj laLFkk esa fjDr] lapkyd e.My ds LFkku ij lgdkfjrk foLrkj vf/kdkj] nfr;k
dks /kkjk 53 ¼12½ izHkkjh vf/kdkjh ds :i esa fu;qDr djrk gwWA bl gsrq e0iz0 lgdkjh lkslk;Vht vf/kfu;e 1960 ds varxZr fuokZpu gsrq fu/kkZfjr
izfdz;k ,oa e0iz0 lgdkjh lkslk;Vht fu;e 1962 ds varxZr ntZ izfdz;k esa o.kZu vuqlkj lgk;d iath;d] lgdkjh laLFkk;sa] nfr;k }kjk vkxkeh dk;Zokgh dj mDr
inkas dh iwfrZ 'kh?kz lqfuf'pr djok;saA bl gsrq fuokZpu inkf/kdkjh] lgdkfjrk e0iz0 Hkksiky dks vko';d nLrkost ,oa i=kpkj gsrq vkns'k fnukad ls 7 fnol dh
vof/k fu/kkZfjr dh tkrh gSA^^
Besides re-election, Joint Registrar also directed for action against the Election Officer and Sub-Engineer, Public Health and Engineering Department,
Datia and other officials who were incharge for conducting election for not adhering to the procedure.
Respondent No.5 being aggrieved by order dated 16.05.2014 filed a Writ Petition and challenged the order on the ground that it was beyond the
jurisdiction of the Joint Registrar to have entertained a complaint against the election after the declaration of results on 10/01/2013, which could have
been questioned only by way of election petition under Section 64(v) of 1960 Act.
Pertinent it is to note that in a reply filed to the notice dated 06.12.2013 respondent No.5 did not raise any objection as to jurisdiction of the Joint
Registrar, Co-operative Societies, to entertain the objection against the election proceedings.
The relief sought in the writ petition was objected at by the present appellant by filing reply. And besides raising preliminary objection as to
maintainability because of the availability of remedy of appeal under Section 78 of 1960 Act, it was urged that it was within the jurisdiction of the Joint
Registrar to have entertained the complaint under Section 80A as the complaint was as regard to the election proceedings which was conducted by
the officials nominated by the Registrar.Â
It may be noted at this stage that in the statute i.e. M.P. Co-operative Societies Act 1960, new chapter VA was inserted vide Notification No.M.P.
Act 12 of 2013 w.e.f 13.02.2013. And Chapter V-A containing Rules 49-C to 49-K was brought in vogue in M.P. Co-operative Societies Rules,
1962 by Notification No.47 dated 26.06.2013 whereafter, the entire election of the co-operative societies in Madhya Pradesh is now conducted by the
State Co-operative Election Authority appointed under Section 57C of the Act of 1960. Thus, with the change brought with effect from
13.02.2013/26.06.2013, the Registrar, Cooperative Societies or his nominee has now no role to play in conducting the election of the cooperative
Societies.
However, in the present case, the election of the Board of Directors, was prior to 13.02.2013/26.06.2013 and was conducted by the nominees of
the Registrar Co-operative Societies. Thus, empowering the Registrar/Joint Registrar to exercise powers under Section 80A of the Act 1960 to
intervene with the proceedings.
Furthermore, it is not disputed by respondent No.5 that the election proceedings initiated by the Registrar Co-operative Societies or his nominee are
“proceedings†under Section 80A of 1960 Act. It is held to be so in “Naresh Sharma Vs. Commissioner-cum-Registrar Co-operative Society,
Bhopal and others [2008(5) MPHT 208]†wherein it is held:
“6. Before adverting to decide the question on merit with regard to cancellation of the election in question, the power of the Registrar to interfere in
the matter after part of the election process is concluded requires consideration. As this is the legal question warranting adjudication in this petition.
Section 80-A of the Act was incorporated with effect from 7th August, 1999, vide, amending Act No.20/99. The aforesaid section contemplates
that the Registrar may at any time on his own motion or on the application made by any party, call for and examine the records of any enquiry or
proceedings held by a Subordinate Officer or a decision by a committee of a society, etc., can examine the legality, propriety and validity of the order
passed or action taken and the Registrar in case it appears to him that any decision taken or any order passed or a proceeding held is illegal then the
Registrar is empowered to pass such orders as he deems fit in the facts and circumstances that have come on record. The question, therefore, is as to
whether the Election Officer or the Returning Officer can be terms as an “officer subordinate†to the Registrar and whether a proceeding held
for conducting an election can be a “proceeding†as contemplated in Section 80-A of the Act.
Even though placing reliance on ajudgment by a Bench of this Court in the case of Lokendra Singh Bhadoriya and another (supra), Shri
Raghavendra Dixit has emphasised that the ""proceeding"" of an election is not a proceeding within the meaning of section 80 of the Act. I am afraid
the contention of Shri Dixit is incorrect. In the case of Lokendra Singh Bhadoriya and another (supra), the learned Court has held in Paragraph 5 after
considering the provisions of section 80 that the preparation of voters list and publication of election programme cannot be a proceeding within section
80 of the Act but the entire election conducted and the final decision is a ""proceeding"" within the meaning of section 80 of the Act. The learned Judge
after considering the provisions of section 80 of the Act and after taking note of the provisions of rule 41 of the rules of 1962has emphasised that the
proceedings will mean actual action taken in pursuance to the notification for election. Publication of a notification for election, it is held cannot be a
proceeding by the officer subordinate to the Registrar. It is illustrated as an example that when a notice for noconfidence motion is issued, it cannot be
said to be a proceeding but when the motion is discussed and a resolution is passed it becomes a proceeding. Similarly, it is held that the publication of
election programme is nothing but the notice of election and manner in which the election has to be held, that is, filing of nomination papers, withdrawal
of nomination papers, scrutiny, co-option and election of the members. The election alone shall be the proceeding by the Subordinate Officer.
Thereafter taking note of the meaning of the word ""proceeding"" as defined in the Shorter Oxford Dictionary, it is held that the entire election
proceeding which include declaration of result is a proceeding held before the officer subordinate to the Registrar. It is held by the learned Judge in
this case that the proceeding will mean where actual action in pursuance of notification taken place. This observation by the learned Judge is based on
the principles laid down by a Bench of this Court in the case of Rustom Singh and another Vs. Election Officer, Vipnan Sahkari Samiti Ltd., Lahar
and others, 1990 RN 324, wherein after considering the provisions of section 80 and section 64(2)(v) of the Act, it has been held by the Division
Bench that an Election Officer is a Subordinate Officer to the Registrar and the election proceeding is a ""proceeding"" in which the Registrar can
interfere exercising jurisdiction under section 80 of the Act of 1960, that being so, I find no substance in the argument advanced by Shri Raghavendra
Dixit to the effect that the Registrar has no power to quash the process of election. Accordingly, it is to be held that the Returning Officer conducting
election is a ""Subordinate Officer"" as contemplated under section 80-A of the Act and the election process as per the notified election programme is a
proceeding"" as contemplated under section 80-A of the Act and the said view expressed by this Court is clearly established from the principle laid
down in the cases of Lokendra Singh Bhadoriya and another (supra) and Rustom Singh and another (supra). Accordingly, the first contention of Shri
Raghavendra Dixit with regard to power and jurisdiction of the Registrar to pass the impugned order is unsustainable and has to be and is hereby
rejected.â€
The decision in Naresh Sharma (Supra) has been affirmed by the Division Bench vide order dated 04/07/2011 passed in Writ Appeal No.651/2007.
Thus, even when the proceedings in the election of co-operative societies is found to be illegal in the case where such proceedings are initiated by
the Registrar, Co-operative Societies or his nominees, it will be within their jurisdiction to cause indulgence invoking powers conferred under Section
80A of 1960 which envisages:
“80-A. Power of Registrar to call for proceedings of subordinate officers and Board of Directors of a society and to pass orders thereon.- The
Registrar may, at any time on his own motion or on an application made by any party, call for and examine the record of any enquiry or the
proceedings by any sub-ordinate officer or a decision or order of the Board of Directors of a society for the purpose of satisfying himself as to the
legality or propriety of any decision or order passed and as to the regularity of the proceedings of such officer or Board of Directors. If in any case it
appears to the Registrar that any decision or order of proceedings so called for should be modified, annulled or reversed, the Registrar may pass such
order thereon as he may deem fit :
Provided that in case of co-operative credit structure, the findings observed by the Registrar shall be communicated to the society, and the society
shall place on record before the committee the advise so communicated and take appropriate decision:
Provided further that no order under this Section shall be made to the prejudice of any party unless such party has had an opportunity of being heard:
Provided also that the powers conferred on the Registrar under this Section shall not be delegated to an officer not below the rank of Joint
Registrar.â€
In the case at hand evidently, the election proceedings  were  held  prior  to 13.02.2013/26.06.2013 by the Registrar/Joint Registrar
under Section 52 B of 1960 Act. Thus the provisions contained under Chapter VA and the Rules made thereunder are not applicable.
Since proceedings in the election of Board of Directors of Primary Agriculture Credit Cooperative Society, Jigna Datia was found fault with, it was
within the competence of Joint Registrar to have caused indulgence.
Learned Single Judge having glossed over above aspects committed error in holding that the Joint Registrar Co-operative Societies Gwalior, had no
jurisdiction. The impugned order therefore deserves to be and is hereby set aside. The order dated 16/05/2014 passed by the Joint Registrar is upheld.
With the insertion of Chapter VA in the Act of 1960, the State Co-operative Election Authority Authority is now directed to hold election of Board of
Directions, Primary Agriculture Credit Cooperative Society, Jigna Datia, as per law.
Appeal is disposed of finally in above terms.