D.M.Chandrashekhar, K.B.Asthana - (1.) THIS is an appeal from the order of K. C. Agrawal, J., dismissing Civil Misc. Writ No. 12570 of 1975. The petitioners therein are the appellants.
(2.) THE material facts are these : THE Zila Sahkari Federation Ltd., Etawah, (shortly called hereafter as the Society) is a registered Cooperative Society. Its committee of management (hereinafter referred to as the Committee) was reconstituted on 11-9-1974, when 12 members were elected and two members were nominated to the Committee which in turn elected on 16-9-1974, appellant-1, Ch. Ram Babu Yadav, as its Chairman. In purported exercise of the powers under Section 34 of the U. P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 (shortly called the Act), the Government of Uttar Pradesh nominated respondent-3, Lakhan Singh Yadav, as the Chairman and respondents 4 to 7 as the members of the Committee. THE State Government has subscribed more than 25% of the capital of the Society. But the amount so subscribed is very much less than Rs. 15,00,000/-. In the writ petition the appellant herein and the Society had challenged the order of the State Government dated 30-9-1975, nominating respondent 3 as the Chairman and respondents 4 to 7 as the members of the Committee and had also prayed for issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere with functioning of appellant-1 as the Chairman of the Society and also functioning of the elected members of the Committee. By his order dated 10-3-1976, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition holding that under Section 34 of the Act it was competent for the State Government to nominate respondent 3 as the Chairman and respondents 4 to 7 as members of the Committee. The learned single Judge also took the view that the writ petition was liable to be dismissed also on the ground that the petitioners were guilty of making a false statement in the affidavit in support of the writ petition.
(3.) IN this appeal Shri D. P. S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the appellants, contested the correctness of the view of the learned single Judge as to the competence of the State Government to nominate respondent-3 as the Chairman of the Society. Shri Chauhan also submitted that the petitioners had not made deliberately any false statement or misrepresentation of facts in the affidavit in support of the writ petition. The principal question that arises for determination in this appeal, is that where the State Government has contributed more than 25% of the capital of a Cooperative Society, but less than Rs. 15 Lacs, whether it (the State Government) has the right to nominate the Chairman of the Committee. Shri Chauhan contended that unless the State Government has subscribed not less than Rs. 15 lacs to the capital of a Cooperative Society, it has no right to nominate the Chairmam of the Society whatever may be the percentage of the share capital of the Government in the total share capital of that Society. On the other hand, the learned Advocate General, who appeared for respondent-1 (the State Government), and Shri Asif Ansari, learned counsel for respondent-3, sought to support the view taken by the learned single Judge.;