SAPTAPARNI CO OPERATIVE HOUSINGSOCIETY LTD Vs. PROFESSOR CHITTA MITRA
LAWS(CAL)-1997-7-18
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on July 01,1997

SAPTAPARNI CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD Appellant
VERSUS
PROFESSOR CHITTA MITRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

B.M.Mitra, J. - (1.) The order impugned is set aside and is superseded by the present order as directed hereinbefore. The revisional application was succeed to the extent as indicated above. The instant application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against an order of the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, West Bengal being appended to the writ petition as annexure 'E' by which the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, West Bengal has passed an ad-interim exparte order that the Annual General Meeting of the petitioner's Society scheduled to be held on 11.5.97 at 2:00 p.m. in Society's premises is not to be held until further orders and the same is reflected from a letter addressed to the Chairman of the Managing Committee of Saptaparni Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. In the connected notice of the proposed Annual General Meeting for 1996-97 as appearing from annexure 'B' enclosed to the petition, it appears that multiple items have been included in the agenda thereon. The said order appears to be further passed by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, West Bengal. Mr. Saktinath Mukherjee, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has relied on and referred to the provisions contained in section 96(3) of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 and according to him, it is the Registrar who on receipt of an application of any party of a dispute referred to him under sub-section(1) of section 95 may make such interlocutory orders on such terms as he may think fit and necessary. Mr. Mukherjee has contended that in view of the terms of section 96(3) of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, there is no power of delegation and as such the assumption of jurisdiction by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Society is unauthorised and is by way of irregular exercise of jurisdiction. The said submissions of Mr. Mukherjee cannot be taken very seriously in view of the definition of 'Registrar' within the meaning of definition clause of section 2(37) of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 which means a Registrar appointed under section 9 and includes any other person appointed under that section to assist the Registrar. In this context, a reference can be made to Rule 2(b) of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Rules, 1987 which contemplates Additional Registrar, Joint Registrar, Chief Auditor of Co-operative Societies, District Auditor of Co-operative Societies and Co-operative Development Officer mean respective persons appointed by those designated by the State Government to assist the Registrar of Co-operative Societies. Therefore, in the backdrop of the definition of the word 'Registrar' as focussed in the Act and also the comprehesive projection of the terms as given in the relevant rule as aforesaid, it cannot be said in agreement with the submission of Mr. Mukherjee that assumption of jurisdiction by Deputy Registrar is not permissible and it should ordinarily mean that the order passed by the Registrar will include even an order passed by the Deputy Registrar.
(2.) It appears that in terms of items No.3 of the agenda of the proposed Annual General Meeting as appearing in annexure 'B' appended to the revisional application, election of the new Board of Director of the Society is proposed to be held. The said ad-interim ex-parte order of injunction puts a halt to the election process which has been set on in motion pursuant to the issuance of the notice dated 16th April, 1997. In this context, it is salient to refer to the observations made by Hon'ble Sri J.S. Verma, J. (now Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India) in Sewa Sahakari Sanstha, Mahagarh v. Ramchandra Narayan Kokil, reported in AIR 1974, M.P., 164 is a pointer that election process in respect of a Co-operative Society once started should be allowed to continue without any interruption. The same has been approvingly quoted in the case of Ram Sarpur Dohare & Anr v. Ayukt Sahkarith Aram Panjiyak Sakhorish Sawastha, M.P. & Ors. reported in AIR 1996, M.P., 187. Even, in a case of Roopram v. State of Rajasthan, reported in AIR 1995, Rajasthan, 9, it has been observed indirectly that interference with the case of election should be discouraged. Even, in the case of Dr. N.B. Khare v. Election Commissioner of India, reported in AIR 1957,SC, 694 Supreme Court has observed that the question of exercise of jurisdiction by the court to enquire into and dispel doubts and disputes arising out of election should be considered after the entire election process is completed. Here, in this case, because of the issuance of an ad-interim ex-parte order, the process being set on motion seems to have been nipped in the bud at the point of threshold of commencement.
(3.) It has been submitted by Mr. Mukherjee that in terms of section 25(1) of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 1983, however, Co-operative Societies shall hold at least once in every year a general meeting to be called which is for the purpose of holding election. If the same cannot be allowed to be held within the period of one year which is due to expire on the expiration month of June, Mr. Mukherjee has pointed out that the same is likely to be followed up by pernicious implications. According to Mr. Mukherjee it is likely to frustrate the operation of the mandatory provision of the Act and if it is not allowed to be held because of the intervention of the court, then election of the office bearers will not be possible. In this context, Mr. Mukherjee, the learned counsel of the petitioner has referred to decision of Kishen Chand v. Commissioner of Police, reported in AIR 1961, S.C., 705 where the Supreme Court has held that procedural provision of the statute can also enter into the field of the verdict as to reasonableness. Here, the order impugned may frustrate the very purpose of the statute. The prohibition by way of an ad-interim order of exparte injunction may set at naught the item No.3 of the agenda of the proposed meeting which will make it impossible for the Co-operative Society to elect the new members in the Board of Directors for the currency of the year.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.