KAMTA PRASAD Vs. REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) BY this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution the petitioner kamta Prasacl seeks a writ of certiorari for quashing an order passed by the registrar, Co-operative Societies, on 31st May 1966 expelling him from 14 Cooperative societies registered under the Madhya Pradesh Cooperative Societies act, 1960. , An appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order of the registrar was rejected by the State Government and a writ of certiorari has been sought for quashing also this order of the Government.
(2.) THE material facts are that till the passing of the impugned order the applicant was a member of 14 Co-operative Societies. He was a primary member of some of the Cooperative Societies and also President or Chairman of some of them. In other Co-operative Societies, he was a member of the managing committee. Of the Co-operative Societies in which the petitioner was a member, some are banking Co-operative Societies and others are marketing Co-operative Societies. The Bhopal Printers and Publishers Co-operative Press Ltd. , Bhopal, of which the petitioner was the President, used to publish a Hindi weekly "kisan Rajya". In the issues of the paper dated 26th January 1965, 10th February 1965 and 18th march 1965 certain articles and news items appeared having a bearing on matters which were sub judice in a prosecution against Bishambhar Dayal and others in respect of offences under Sections 420, 465, 471, 477-A, 201 and 120-B of the indian Penal Code pending in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Kanpur. Bishambhar Dayal and other accused persons moved the Allahabad H4gh Court for punishing the petitioner Kamta Prasad and the printer and publisher of the paper "kisan Rajya" for contempt of Court in respect of the objectionable publications. In these contempt of Court proceedings the Allahabad High Court found the applicant kamta Prasad guilty of contempt of Court and imposed on him a fine of Rs. 1,000 or in default to suffer one month's simple imprisonment. In the judgment finding Kamta Prasad guilty of contempt of Court, the learned judge of the Allahabad High Court who decided the contempt case observed:
"i have also had occasion to watch the demeanour of Kamta Prasad when he was in the witness-box on various dates. In my judgment he is a liar, a trickster and a wholly unreliable: person, who has fruitlessly tried to snare M. Dayal into this case. His evidence and other material on record show that he has instituted a criminal case against M. Dayal at bhopal, which is still pending. It is obvious that Kamta Prasad has tried to involve M. Dayal in this case out of his pique and animosity towards the latter, by shifting major responsibility on Him. I, therefore, find that there is no evidence against M. Dayal (respondent No. 7) to fasten any responsibility on him regarding the impugned printing and publication in various issues in the "kisan Rajya ". In the end, the learned Judge also said: "before parting with this case I am constrained to remark that Kamta prasad respondent has intentionally given wrong deposition and has also fabricated false evidence in the course of these proceedings, as discussed above. Hence for the eradication of the evil of perjury and fabrication of false evidence and in the interest of justice it is expedient that Kamta Prasad be prosecuted for the offence under Section 193 of the Indian Penal Code. The Registrar of the High Court is directed to forward a complaint against Kamta Prasad to a Magistrate of the first class having jurisdiction to try the same, setting forth the facts of the case and pointing out the evidence, which is false and fabricated, in the light of my observations contained in this judgment. " when this judgment came to the notice of the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, madhya Pradesh, the Registrar wrote a letter to Kamta Prasad suggesting that in view of the strictures passed against him by the Allahabad High Court in the contempt matter, it would be in his own interest as well as in the interest of the Cooperative Societies of which he was a member to resign voluntarily from the membership of those bodies. The applicant was first inclined to accept this suggestion. Later on, when he showed his reluctance to adopt the course suggested by the Registrar, the Registrar issued a notice to him on 10th March 1966 under Rule 18 of the Madhya Pradesh Co-operative Societies Rules, 1962, asking him to explaia why he should not be expelled from the membership of the co-operative Societies enumerated in the annexure to the notice. In his reply to this notice, the applicant questioned the jurisdiction of the Registrar to take the action that he had proposed and enquired whether any of the Cooperative societies of which he was a member had asked the Registrar to take action against him under Rule 18 (2 ). He also expressed the desire that he should be heard personally and that he wanted to lead evidence to show that the action of expulsion intended to be taken against him was 'actuated by ulterior motives and with a view to defame him. " In his explanation be also suggested that "unwarranted action under Rule 18 (2) was beiug taken against him on account of political pressure exerted on the Minister by the vested interest and certain political circles".
(3.) THIS explanation of the petitioner did not impress the Registrar. In his opinion when the Allahabad High Court had described the petitioner as a "liar" and a "trickster" and directed his prosecution for the offence of perjury, it was clearly in the interest of the Societies of which the petitioner was a member that the petitioner should be expelled from those Societies. Accordingly, he passed the impugned order expelling the petitioner from the membership of the Co-operative societies mentioned in the annexure to the order dated 31st May 1966.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.