The Siruguppa Taluka Agricultural Producing Marketing Committee vs The State of Karnataka and Others

B. Manohar, J.

Petitioner, in this petition, has sought for quashing the Circular dated 08.01.2015 and also the clarification notification dated 12.01.2015 issued by the 2nd respondent.

The petitioner is Siruguppa Taluka Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee, represented by its President. It is registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act'', for short). The said Society advances loans and other agricultural products to all the agriculturists of Siruguppa Taluk. As per Bye-law No. 16(18) of the Bye-laws, the Society has to make minimum transaction prior to three years of the election and then only the Society will become the eligible voter. The State Government amended the Act, pursuant to the 97th Constitution Amendment and amended Section 20(2)(a-v) of the Act. As per the said amendment, the members or representatives who have failed to utilise such number of service or facilities in a co-operative year as may be specified in the bye-laws for three consecutive cooperative years are not eligible to vote. Pursuant to the amendment brought into the Act, the petitioner-Committee also brought in necessary amendment to its bye-laws. In the bye-law, it was made clear that the Society having minimum transaction prior to three cooperative years of the election are only eligible to become eligible voters.

Some of the Societies sought clarification with regard to the amendment to Section 20(2)(a-v) of the Act, as to whether the said amendment was prospective or retrospective in operation. The 1st respondent issued a communication dated 08.01.2015 to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies to clarify that the amendment was prospective in operation and would come into force three years after 11.02.2013. On the basis of the said communication, the 2nd respondent issued clarification as per Annexure-D dated 12.01.2015. In view of the clarification issued by the 2nd respondent, the ineligible members have become eligible to vote. That is not the intent of the amendment. Similar notifications are issued by the State Government for the year 2010-11. The said notifications have been quashed by this Court in W.A. Nos. 6071-6072/2010 disposed of on 22nd April 2010. Further, under Section 132 of the Act, if there is any difficulty, the State Government may by notification in a final gazette make such provision. In the instant case, as the Government has not notified the said clarification in the Gazette, the clarification issued by the State Government runs contrary to the Act and therefore, the petitioner sought for quashing the same.

Shri. M. Kumar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents contended that in view of the 97th Constitution Amendment, the State Government amended the Act and also amended Section 20(2)(a-v). As per the said provision, the person who has failed to avail the minimum service or facilities in the Co-operative Societies for three co-operative years, then only he is disqualified from voting. The amendment as brought into the statute by Act No. 3/2013 on 11.02.2013. The 2nd respondent sought for some clarification from the State Government for implementation of Section 20(2)(a-v). The State Government, by its communication dated 08.01.2015 informed the 2nd respondent that the amendment came into force on 11.02.2013 and it is prospective in operation i.e., it will come into force after three years of the amendment. On the basis of the said clarification, the 2nd respondent issued clarification vide Annexure-D dated 12.01.2005. The Government has not issued any notification contrary to Section 20(2)(a-v). It is only a clarification and does not run contrary to the provisions of the Co-operative Societies Act. Hence, sought for dismissal of the writ petition.

I have carefully considered the arguments addressed by the advocates appearing for the parties, perused the orders impugned and other relevant records.

Records clearly disclose that new amendment to the Act was brought in as per the Act No. 3/2013 with effect from 11.02.2013. Sub-Section (1) of Section 20 of the Act provides that no member, no representative or no delegate of a Society shall have more than one vote in the general meeting or in the election of the members of the board of co-operative society. Sub-section (2) of Section 20 specifies certain categories of the members who shall not have the right to vote at a general body meeting or in an election to the members of the board of the Co-operative Society in which they are members. The relevant Section reads as under:

"Section 20. Votes of members- (1) xxxx

(2) The following shall not have the right to vote at a general meeting or an election of the members of the board of the co-operative society in which they are members, namely:--

(a) a nominal or associate member;

(a-i) an individual member who is a defaulter;

(a-ii) members admitted as per clauses (d), (e), (f) and (g) of sub-section (1) of section 16, who are defaulters;

(a-iii) a person who has become member of a society not later than twelve months prior to the date of such meeting:

Provided that nothing in this clause shall apply to member of a society participating in the first general body meeting of such society held immediately after its registration;

(a-iv) a member, a representative or a delegate who has failed to attend three general meetings out of the last five general meetings;

(a-v) a member or a representative who has failed to utilise such minimum services or facilities in a cooperative year as may be specified in the byelaws for three consecutive cooperative years."

In view of the amendment to the Act, the bye-laws of the Co-operative Society was amended accordingly. It cannot be said to be contrary to the intendment of the Act. All the amendments would be prospective in nature unless it is specifically made retrospective in nature. In view of the clarification sought by the 2nd respondent, the State Government, by its communication dated 08.01.2015, clarified that the amendment to Section 20(2)(a-v) is prospective in nature which would come into force three years after the Amendment Act came into force. The 2nd respondent clarified the same to the Co-operative Societies. The voters'' list has to be prepared as per the amendment made to the Co-operative Societies. Further, a Co-operative Society has to amend the bye-law in accordance with the provisions of the Act. In the instant case, the Siruguppa Taluk Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee amended the bye-law No. 16(18) in accordance with amendment and same is not contrary to Section 20(2)(a-v) of the Act. The clarification by the Government as well as the 2nd respondent is not contrary to the provisions of the Act. This amendment is prospective in nature. If a person does not utilise such minimum services or facilities from the Society consecutively for three co-operative years, then he will not be entitled to vote in election. It is only after three years from 11.02.2013. Hence, I find there is no infirmity or irregularity in the communication dated 08.01.2015 issued by the Government as well as the clarification dated 12.01.2015 issued by the 2nd respondent. The intendment of the Section has been clarified by the State Government. The said clarification need not be gazetted under Section 132 of the Act. The petitioner has not made out a case to interfere either with the communication dated 08.10.2015 or with the clarification communication dated 12.01.2015 issued by the 2nd respondent. The writ petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed.