R.P.SETHI AND SAT PAL, JJ. - (1.) THE vires of Punjab Cooperative Societies (Amendment) Act of 1993 (being Act No. XIX of 1993) in so far as newly incorporated Sections 26 (1b) and 26 (B) (2) of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act are concerned, have been challenged by the petitioners who were elected as members of the Cooperative Societies for a term of three years under the unamended Act. Admittedly, the petitioners have completed their tenure for which they were elected. It is not disputed that the State Legislature had the competence to legislate the amending Act XIX of 1993 but it is submitted that as the amendment of Section 26 IB and 26 B (2) has resulted in the discrimination, the same is required to be set aside. Elaborating his arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that as the persons who were to be elected under the amended Act have to serve for a period of five years, the petitioners cannot be deprived of the benefit of serving for the aforesaid term despite the fact that they were elected for a period of three years only under the unamended Act. Our attention has been drawn to the aims and object of the amending Act which envisages longer tenure and better continuity avoiding frequent elections.
(2.) IT is settled proposition of law that the right to vote or stand as a candidate for election is not a civil right or fundamental right but is the creation of statute or special law which is "subject to the limitations imposed by the relevant statute. Relying upon the earlier judgments in N. P Ponnuswami v. The Returning Officer A. I. R. 1952 S. C. 64 and Jagan Nath v. State of Punjab, A. I. R. 1957 S. C. 201 it was reiterated by the Supreme Court in Jyoti Basu and Ors. v. Debi Ghosal and Ors. , A. I. R. 1982 S. C. 983 as under : "a right to elect, fundamental though it is to democracy, is, anomalously enough, neither a fundamental right nor a common Law Right. It is pure and simple a statutory right. So, is the right to be elected. So is the right to dispute an election. Outside of statute, there is no right to elect, no right to be elected and no right to dispute an election. Statutory creations they are, and therefore, subject to statutory limitations. An election petition is not an action at Common Law, nor in equity. "
(3.) WHILE approving the law laid down in Jyoti Basu's case (supra), the Supreme Court in 'rama Kant Pandey v. Union of India, J. T. I. 1993 (1) S. C. 440 has held that right to vote or right to elect is neither a fundamental nor a civil right but was a pure and simple statutory right.;