AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
V.M. Sahai, J.
1 These writ petitions have been filed by the Petitioners who are members of Co-operative Societies dispensing agricultural credit in the market area. With the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, all these petitions are heard together on merits and they are being disposed of by this common judgment as they pertain to the same question of law involved in these petitions. Special Civil Application No. 10294 of 2011 shall be the leading writ petition.
2 The Director of Agricultural Marketing and Rural Finance, Gujarat State issued a notification dated 21.06.2011 fixing the date of election of Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Dhoraji, District Rajkot (for short the APMC) which is in vernacular (Gujarati) and its English translation is extracted as under:
Notice instructing about General Election-2011 of Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Dhoraji, Taluka Dhoraji, District Rajkot.
Intimation is hereby given to all the concerned of the market area of Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Dhoraji, Taluka Dhoraji, District Rajkot that as per the provision made in section -11 of the Gujarat Agriculture Produce Market Act, 1963, as the period of the existing Committee is going to be over, the programme with regard to the general election of the said Committee has been kept as mentioned below. In this connection, this notice is published under Rule- 10(2) of the Rules of the Gujarat Agriculture Produce Market of the year 1965.
Name of Market Area
Name of Polling Station.
Name of members to elect
Date, Place and time for giving letters of nomination.
Date, Place and time for verifying letters of nomination.
Date of withdrawal of candidature.
Date of Election
Date, Place and time of vote counting.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Dhoraji, Tal. Dhoraji, Dist. Rajkot
(1) Farmer Section (2) Trade Section (3) Section of Co-operative Marketing Societies
8 4 1
Date : 12.09.2011 in the office of Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Dhoraji, Tal. Dhoraji, Dist. Rajkot. Time : From 11.00 a.m. To 17.00 p.m.
Date : 13.09.2011 in the office of Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Dhoraji, Tal. Dhoraji, Dist. Rajkot. Time : From 11.00 a.m. Till completion.
Date : 16.09.2011 in the office of Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Dhoraji, Tal. Dhoraji, Dist. Rajkot. Time : From 11.00 a.m. To 15.00.
Date : 26.09.2011 in the office of Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Dhoraji, Tal. Dhoraji, Dist. Rajkot. Time : From 9.00 a.m. To 17.00.
Date : 27.09.2011 in the office of Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Dhoraji, Tal. Dhoraji, Dist. Rajkot. Time : From 9.00 a.m. Till completion.
No.bsr/01/th/1908/2011, The Director, Agriculture Market and Rural Economy, Block No. 13/2, Dr. Jivraj Mehta Bhawan, Gujarat State, Gandhi Nagar, dtd.21/3/11.
Sd/- illegible
( M.D. Chauhan )
The Director, Agriculture Market and Rural Economy, Gujarat State, Gandhi Nagar.
Note: Each candidate shall deposit Rs. 100/- along with candidature letter in the office of the District Registrar, Co-Operative Assembly, Rajkot, Dist. Rajkot and the receipt shall be produced along with the letter of appointment.
2.1 The Director of Agricultural Marketing and Rural Finance, Gujarat State also issued an order on 21.06.2011 appointing Co-operation Officer (Marketing) and District Registrar as Authorized Officer to conduct the elections and under Rule 7 (1) fixed 12.07.2011 for sending the list of voters by the Co-operative Societies which were dispensing agricultural credit, to the Authorized Officer for preparing voter list for election of APMC.
The Director of Agricultural Marketing and Rural Finance, Gujarat State, thereafter, announced the detailed programmed for holding elections of APMC, Dhoraji, District Rajkot is in vernacular (Gujarati) and its English translation is as under:
Sr. No.
Particulars of Programme
Date
01.
Declaration of Election.
05.07.2011
02.
To give instruction to the Authorized Officer to prepare voters'' list.
05.07.2011
02 (a).
Date of forwarding voters'' list to the Authorized (Rule � 7)
12.07.2011
03.
Primary Publication of voters'' list within 7 days from the date of calling for list. (Rule 7 (2))
12.07.2011
04(a).
Last date for submitting application for objection and addition and alteration in primary publication list, within 14 days from the date of primary (Rule 8 (1))
29.07.2011
04(b).
Last date for submitting alteration / objection against republished primary voters'' list. (Rule 8 (1) (a)).
10.08.2011
5.
Final publication of voters'' list.
12.09.2011
6.
Date of submission of nomination forms (Rule 10 (2)) from Morning 11 to Evening 5 O''clock.
12.09.2011
7.
Primary notification of nomination forms (Rule14)
12.09.2011
8.
Verification of nomination forms (Rule-15) from Morning 11 to it is completed.
13.09.2011
9.
Date of withdrawing nomination forms Rule 17 (1) from Morning 11 to 3 O''clock.
16.09.2011
10.
Final publication of list of candidates Rule 17 (2)
16.09.2011
11.
Day of election from Morning 9 to 5 O''clock.
26.09.2011
12.
Date of counting of vote from Morning 9 to 5
O''clock.
27.09.2011
13.
Date of result of election (Rule-21)
27.09.2011
In these writ petitions, the Petitioners have challenged the order/public notice dated 10.08.2011 by which the objection filed under Rule 8 (1-A) by the Petitioners on 05.08.2011 and 07.08.2011 challenging the revised voter list published under Rule 8 (1-A) on 31.07.2011. The main objection of the Petitioners was that 12 co-operative societies have been registered by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies on 02.07.2011 and on other dates up to 14.07.2011 and their members have been treated to be valid members and their names have wrongly been included in the revised voter list though their names did not figure in the preliminary voter list which was published on 15.07.2011.
4.1 It is stated in the affidavit-in-reply that under the Gujarat Agricultural Produce Market Rules, 1965 (for short Rules 1965), the Petitioner has right to object to the name mentioned in the preliminary/ provisional voter list. It has also been stated that in view of the Full Bench decision of this Court in Daheda Group Seva Sahakari Mandli Limited v. R. D. Rohit, Authorized Officer and Co-Operative Officer (Marketing) 2006 GCD 211 and other decisions, inclusion or exclusion of name in the voter list could not be considered under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the remedy of the Petitioners lies under Rule 28 of the Rules 1965 for filing election petition.
4.2 It is further stated that since all the 12 Societies have been registered prior to notification by the Director, Agricultural Marketing and Rural Finance, Gujarat State for holding election of the Market Committee, the names of the Managing Committee of the Societies have rightly been included in the voter list by the Authorized Officer. It has been reemphasized that the members of the Respondent No. 4 Society had collected deposits which have been disbursed to the needy members of the society. Hence, it is clear that the Society is dispensing agricultural credit on the date of declaration of the election.
The other challenge by the Petitioners in these writ petitions is to the order dated 02.07.2011 passed by the Additional District Registrar, Co-operative Societies (Panchayat) Co-operative Societies and Member, District Technical Committee, District Panchayat, Rajkot, Respondent No. 3, by which the Respondent No. 4 Shree Bhadajalia Seva Sahkari Mandali Ltd. and other Seva Sahkari Mandali Ltd., have been registered. The Petitioner has also challenged the order passed by the State Government dated 31.8.1981.
5.1 The objection to the registration of the 12 Co-operative Societies by the Petitioners is based on the fact that the Petitioner society operates in village Nani Marad and Bhadajalia of Taluka Dhoraji, District Rajkot. The Petitioner has 320 Members, out of which, 138 members have availed the agricultural credit from the Petitioner Society. The total number of agriculturists in both the aforesaid villages is 418, out of which 320 are members of the Petitioner society. The Co-operative Society of the Petitioner is affiliated with Rajkot District Co-operative Bank Ltd. and the members of the Society could avail financial assistance also from the Bank. A drive has been initiated by the District Registrar, Rajkot to register the new Co-operative Society to inflate voters list in respect of various local authorities, including the APMC, Dhoraji and other Co-operative Societies, just to benefit the party in power.
5.2 A Notice dated 11.4.2011 was issued by the Additional District Registrar, Rajkot, Co-operative Societies (Panchayat) to the Petitioner to file objection, if any, against the proposed registration of the Respondent No. 4 Society. The Petitioner submitted a detailed representation/objection to the notice dated 11.4.2011 and in the objection, it was mentioned by the Petitioner that there was absolutely no need to have any other Co-operative Societies to cover the area for operation, in which the Petitioner Society was operating. It was also pointed out by the Petitioner that about 14 members of the Petitioner society were included in the list of members of the Respondent No. 4 Society without the consent of the Petitioner. It was also stated that total profit of the society of the Petitioner was only Rs. 17,000/-, which is a very negligible amount, therefore, second Co-operative Society in the area may not be registered. Without considering the objection of the Petitioner, the Additional Registrar Co-operative Societies (Panchayat) passed impugned order dated 2.7.2011 without assigning any reason for granting registration in favour of Respondent No. 4 Society. Copy of the registration made on 2.7.2011 was not given to the Petitioner in spite of letter dated 28.7.2011. However, copy of the order dated 2.7.2011 was received from Dilipbhai Chavda, who is a member of the District Panchayat, Rajkot on 28.7.2011. The fact of registration of the Respondent No. 4 Society and other newly registered Co-operative Societies has been challenged by the Petitioners.
5.3 A further affidavit has been filed by the Petitioner to the effect that Nathubha Jilubha Jadeja is the President of the Society and is also voter in respect of the Agriculturists constituency of APMC, Dhoraji. The Director has issued an election programme by notification dated 21.6.2011. Respondent No. 4 Society has not opened its account with District Central Co-operative Bank till date and as per the Scheme of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 (for short the Co-operative Act) the aforesaid Society is required to open a Bank account with the District Central Co-operative Bank and seek financial assistance so that the agricultural credit may be given to the farmers who are members of the Society. A certificate dated 8.8.2011 to the effect that no account has been opened, issued by Shri Rajkot District Co-operative Bank Ltd. has been filed along with the further affidavit. On the other hand, Respondent No. 4 Society has opened its account at State Bank of India, Dhoraji Branch, which is clear from the certificate issued by the Bank on 8.8.2011, which is a Saving Account but no agricultural or other credit had been advanced to the Respondent No. 4 Society. Since no account has been opened with the District Central Co-operative Bank, the Respondent No. 4 Society could not dispense the agricultural credit to its members without there being any financial assistance from the bank in view of the date of registration of the society and date of declaration of the election programmer.
5.4 It is absolutely not possible to dispense the agricultural credit. u/s 49 read with the applicable bye-laws, which are model by laws, a detailed procedure has been provided for dispensation of agricultural credit. The procedure involves receiving applications from the members, applying for sanction of loan to the Bank, sanction of the loan by the Bank to the Society, creation of mortgage deeds, registration with Talati-cum-Mantri of the concerned village etc. The procedure under the Co-operative Act is required to be followed, which provides a detailed procedure for inviting objections etc. before creation of the charge under the provisions of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code. None of these has taken place so far so far as Respondent No. 4 Society or its members are concerned. Since no agricultural credit has been dispensed, the members of the Managing Committee of Respondent No. 4 Society are not entitled to be included in the list of voters of agriculture constituency. It is also pointed out that the Respondent No. 4 Society has been registered on the eve of declaration of the election programmed with sole object of inflating the list of voters in the election of APMC, Dhoraji and inclusion of names of the members of the Managing Committee of Respondent No. 4 Society in the list is bad and illegal. The Petitioner has also pointed out that the Election Officer has included the members of the Managing Committee of 12 Societies in the provisional list of voters published on 31.7.2011.
5.5 The list of Societies is in vernacular (Gujarati) of which English translation is as follows:
Sr. No
Name of Society
Whether opened account with District Central Co. Op. Bank.
Bank with which account opened, if any.
Whether any agricultural loan disbursed by SBI / BOB
Date of Registration of Co-operative Society
1.
Shree Patanvav Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,
No
SBI, Patanvav Branch
No
31.3.2011
2.
Shree Patidar Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,
No
SBI, Patanvav Branch
No
31.3.2011
3.
Shree Chichod Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,
No
SBI, Patanvav Branch
No
31.3.2011
4.
Shree Rushiraj Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,
No
SBI, Dhoraji Branch
No
4.6.2011
5.
Shree Bhojalram Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,
No
SBI, Dhoraji Branch
No
4.6.2011
6.
Shree Khodiyar Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,
No
SBI, Dhoraji Branch
No
4.6.2011
7.
Shree Bhutavad Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,
No
SBI, Dhoraji Branch
No
2.7.2011
8.
Shree Vadodar Kishan Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,
No
BOB, Vadodar
No
2.7.2011
9.
Shree Bhadaljalia Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,
No
SBI, Dhoraji Branch
No
2.7.2011
10.
Shree Moti Parbadi Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,
No
BOB, Moti Parbadi
No
4.7.2011
11.
Shree Sardar Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,
No
SBI, Branch Dhoraji
No
4.7.2011
12.
Shree Umiyaji Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,
No
SBI, Branch Dhoraji
No
4.7.2011
5.6 It is alleged by the Petitioner that the members of the Managing Committee of the aforesaid 12 societies were registered on the eve of declaration of the election programme or after the date of publication of the notification declaring elections of APMC, Dhoraji. The fact is that none of the aforesaid 12 Societies has opened their account with the District Central Co-operative Bank and they have opened their accounts either at State Bank of India or at Bank of Baroda. It is further stated that the names of the voters mentioned from Serial Number 374 to 553 are the names which represents the members of the Managing Committee of the aforesaid 12 societies who are not eligible to be voters nor their members could participate in the election as their societies have never disbursed any agricultural credit to their members/ farmers.
In the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the Respondent No. 4, preliminary objections have been raised that the Petitioner has an alternative remedy of filing an appeal u/s 153 of the Co-operative Act against the registration of the Society of the Respondent No. 4 Society and other Societies, thereafter, if they are aggrieved, they can file revision application u/s 155 of the Co-operative Act. The disputed questions of fact cannot be gone into under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
6.1 It has been further stated that the order passed by the Respondent on 2.7.2011 is a reasoned order. The Bank account in the Central Co-operative Bank Limited could not be opened due to the reason that Vitthalbhai Randadiya, who is, now, Member of the Parliament had earlier been the Chairman of the Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. and was also earlier elected as MLA from Dhoraji constituency and now, after his resignation, his son is elected as MLA from the said constituency and but the Bank under the political influence of the aforesaid Member of the Parliament, refused to open an account of the Respondent No. 4 Society, therefore, the Respondent No. 4 has opened the account with the State Bank of India, which has also given ''No Objection Certificate'' for registration of Respondent No. 4 Society. The members of the societies are being threatened that they would not be given loan by the District Bank. The Member of Parliament wants to create a monopoly and defeat the Co-operative movement in the District and the Petitioner belongs to the group of Vitthalbhai and Respondent No. 4 has filed writ petition, being Special Civil Application No. 5583 of 2011 for opening a Bank account in District Central Co-operative Bank, which is pending before this Court. Respondent No. 4 started to dispense the agricultural credit from its own fund and necessary evidence has been produced before the Authorized Officer.
We have heard Mr. Mihir Thakore, Mr. N. D. Nanavati, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. N. K. Pahwa, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners, Mr. P. K. Jani, learned Government Pleader assisted by Mr. N. J. Shah, Assistant Government Pleader appearing for Respondents, Mr. B. S. Patel, Mr. H. S. Munshaw, learned Counsel appearing for Respondents. Learned Government Pleader Mr. P. K. Jani has produced the records.
The challenge made by the Petitioners to the order dated 02.07.2011 or orders challenging the registration of the twelve Co-operative Societies are concerned, we are of the opinion that the Co-operative Act provides a statutory alternative remedy of appeal and revision under Sections 153 and 155 of the Co-operative Act. Therefore, without entering into merits of the case, we relegate the Petitioners to pursue alternative remedy of appeal and thereafter revision. In case, the Petitioners file an appeal before the Appellate Authority, it shall be decided on merits.
On the argument of learned Counsel for the parties, the following questions arise for consideration in these writ petitions; what is the date when election process commenced; whether the twelve newly registered Co-operative Societies dispensed agricultural credit in the market area and their members could be treated to be valid voters; whether the objections filed by the Petitioners under Rule 8 (1-A) was required to be decided by the Authorized Officer passing a reasoned order; whether in absence of any decision on the objection filed by the Petitioners, it could be argued on behalf of the Authorized Officer that the public notice dated 10.08.2011 would be deemed under Rule 8 (2) his decision and to support his contentions whether the affidavit filed by him stating that he conducted summary inquiry by calling Respondents only could be relied; whether passing of no order by Authorized Officer could be treated to be malice in law; whether the oral suggestion made on behalf of the Authorized Officer that if this Court permits, he would give decision by reasoned order within time to be fixed by the Court, could be accepted; whether the addition of new voters was a fraud on election process; whether in view of Rule 28 of Rules 1965 which provides for election petition, these writ petitions are liable to be dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy.
It is relevant to point out over here that the learned Government Pleader has stated that in public notice dated 10.08.2011, Shree Umiyaji Seva Sahakari Mandli Limited and its members have been deleted for the voter list as this Society was registered on 14.07.2011 after 12.07.2011 and now the dispute is confined to eleven Respondent Co-operative Societies.
Before answering the questions arising in these writ petitions, it is necessary to consider the various provisions of Rules 1965. Rule 4 lays down that Director shall fix the date of election of a Market Committee. Rule 5 provides for different lists of voters. In these petitions, we are concerned with list of voters as provided in Rule 5 (1) which provides preparation of list of voters under Clause (i) of Sub-section (1) of Section 11 of the Gujarat Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1963 (for short the APMC Act) i.e. Co-operative Societies dispensing agricultural credit in the market area. Rule 7 makes the provision for preparation of list of voters for general election for the Market Committee and we are concerned with Rule 7 (1) (i) which relates to preparation of list of voters for general election to the Market Committee and every Co-operative Society dispensing agricultural credit in the market area had been mandated to communicate the full names of the members of its Managing Committee together with the list of residence of each members to the Authorized Officer before 12.07.2011, the date fixed by the Director. The Authorized Officer is under a duty to prepare the list of voters as required by Rule 5 on the basis of the information received by him by the Co-operative Societies dispensing agricultural credit which should contain the full name, place of residence and serial number of each voter. Rule 8 of Rules 1965 reads as under:
Provisional and final publication of lists of voters:
(1) As soon as a list of voters is prepared under Rule 5, it shall be published by the authorized officer by affixing a copy thereof at the office of the market committee and at some conspicuous place in the principal market yard in the market area along with a notice stating that any person whose name is not entered in the list of voters and who claims that his name should be entered therein or any person who thinks that his name or the name of some other person has been wrongly entered therein or has not been correctly entered may, within fourteen days from the date of the publication of the notice, apply to the authorized officer for an amendment of the list of voters.
(1-A) After receiving applications if any, under Sub-rule (1) a revised draft list of voters shall be published by the authorized officer by affixing a copy thereof on the notice board of Agricultural Produce Market Committee and at some conspicuous place in the principal market yard of the market area, along with a notice stating that any person who wishes to raise any objection against any new name entered in this list may apply within seven days from the date of publication of this notice to the authorized officer for an amendment in the revised draft list of voters.
(2) If any application is received under (sub-rule (1-A), the authorized officer shall decide the same and shall cause to be prepared and published the final list of voters, after making such amendments therein as may be necessary in pursuance of the decision given by him on the application. The final list shall be prepared at least thirty days before the date fixed for the nomination of candidates for the election.
11.1 If the above provision of Rule 8 is considered, then it would be borne out that as soon as voters'' list is prepared under Rule 5, the authorized officer who is appointed for conducting the general election of market committee has to publish the said voters'' list by affixing a copy thereof at the office of the market committee and at some conspicuous place in the market yard along with the notice stating that if any person whose name is either not entered or who claims that his name is wrongly entered, should file his objection then within 14 days from the date of publication of the notice, the authorized officer has to decide the said objections. Sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 further provides that after considering and deciding the objections filed under Sub-Rule 1 of Rule 8, the second list which is known as revised draft list has to be published. Rule 8 (1-A) further clarifies that after publication of the revised draft list, a notice is to be issued inviting objections against new names entered in the list and the said objections must be filed within seven days and thereafter, the authorized officer has to decide the said objections under Rule 8 (2) and he must publish final amended list of voters at least 30 days prior to the date fixed for filing nomination papers. Thus, Rule 8 makes it clear that when the first preliminary list is published, if any, person has got any objection either on account of appearing of the names of the voters wrongly or on account of non-appearance of the voters, who deserved to be in the voters'' list, then he must file said objections within 14 days from the date of publication of the said preliminary list and then the authorized officer has to decide the said objection and only after that decision, he has to publish the revised draft list or the provisional list. If the provision of Sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 is carefully read, then it would be clear that any objection for inclusion or non-inclusion of voters in the preliminary list published under that Sub-rule (1) must be taken within 14 days of the said publication. From the aforesaid discussion, it is apparent that after 14 days of publication of the said list, no objection either for inclusion or non-inclusion could be taken or entertained by the authorized officer.
11.2 Sub-rule (1-A) makes it clear that when the revised voters'' list is published, the only objection that could be raised is as regards persons whose names have been added in the voter list, after deciding objections under Sub-rule (1) of Rule 8. This provision is made obviously with a view to see that a person whose name was not published in the preliminary list and his name comes in the revised draft list for the first time, then there must be opportunity to the person objecting to his being in the voters'' list and only with this view, this provision of Sub-rule 1(A) was enacted.
Before we consider the questions raised by learned Counsel for the parties on merits, it is necessary to deal with the preliminary objection raised by learned Counsel for the Respondents that the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy of election petition. Rule 28 of the Rules 1965 provides that election of a candidate who has been elected could be challenged by filing election petition. Learned Counsel for the Respondents has placed reliance on the Full Bench decision of this Court in Daheda Group Seva Sahakari Mandli Limited v. R. D. Rohit, Authorized Officer and Co Operative Officer (Marketing) 2006 GCD 211 wherein in paragraph 33 reference had been answered as under:
In view of the above discussion, we answer the Reference as under :
i. A person whose name is not included in the voters'' list can avail benefit of provisions of Rule 28 of the Rules by filing Election Petition.
ii. As the authority under Rule 28 has wide power to cancel, confirm and amend the election and to direct to hold fresh election in case the election is set aside, remedy under Rule 28 is an efficacious remedy.
iii. Even though a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable though alternative remedy is available, the powers are to be exercised in case of extraordinary or special circumstances such as where the order is ultra virus or nullity and/or ex facie without jurisdiction. The exclusion or inclusion of names in the voters'' list cannot be termed as extraordinary circumstances warranting interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and such questions are to be decided in an Election Petition under Rule 28 of the Rules.
12.1 In view of the aforesaid decision of the Full Bench, it is clear that a person whose name is not included in the voter list and the exclusion or inclusion of names in the voter list cannot be termed as extra ordinary circumstance warranting any interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and such questions could be decided in an election petition under Rule 28 of the Rules as the Authority under Rule 28 had been conferred with wide powers. In view of the aforesaid decision of the Full Bench, these petitions are liable to be dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy. Since we are dismissing these writ petitions on the ground of alternative remedy, it is not necessary for us to consider the other arguments raised by learned Counsel for the parties.
In the result, these writ petitions are dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy of election petition available to the Petitioners under Rule 28 of the Gujarat Agricultural Produce Market Rules, 1965. So far as relief claimed by the Petitioners with regard to registration of the Respondents Co-operative Societies are concerned, it is open to the Petitioners to challenge the order dated 02.07.2011 or other such orders by way of Appeal and thereafter by Revision under Sections 153 and 155 respectively of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961. Parties shall bear their own costs.