- (1.) THIS revision petition filed by the Gram Panchayat Kathawala alias Jai Laxmi-pura, Tehsil Chaksu is directed against the order of the Asstt. Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Jaipur East dated the 4th March, 1963 registering the respondents as Members of the Co-operative Society known as Shiv Doongari Beed Samuhik Krishi Sehkari Samiti Ltd.
(2.) BRIEFLY, the facts of the case are that Khasra No. 1/12 within the boundary of the Gram Panchayat Kathawala known as Shiv Doongari Beed consisted of 304 bighas and 3 biswas. At present this land is under the control of the Forest Department and is about to be handed over to the Revenue Department for allotment for agricultural purposes. The respondents who registered themselves as the Members of the Society are the residents of the village Bhapura, Tehsil Sanganer and not of Shiv Doongari Beed. They have formed themselves into a society in order to secure the allotment of land of the Shiv Doongari area and thus to deprive the landless persons of that area proper. The counsel for the petitioner therefore contended that this registration of the society was an infringement of sec. 10 of the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, 1953 as well as R. 4 of the allotment of land to Co-operative Societies Rules, 59, inasmuch as that under the former Act the members of the Cooperative Society do not belong to the same village in which the land is situated and under the allotment rules the procedure laid down in R. 4 has not been followed, which required that the landless tenants applications are to be invited for allotment of land by the Tehsildar who would make the allotment in Majma-aam i. e. in general meeting in consultation with the Advisory Committee. After the list of such persons is scrutinized and they are declared eligible then alone such members are eligible for registration into the co-operative society. The counsel, further argued that by previously registering themselves into a society the respondents can always lay their claim on a preferential basis as against the local inhabitants of that area. The counsel for the respondents' reply was that no infringement of sec. 10 of the Cooperative Societies Act has taken place. The respondent could always give an undertaking to reside in the village in which their land would be allotted. Further the revision petition of the petitioner is premature as the time of allotment of land has not yet arrived. I have considered the arguments advanced from both sides. The only point for determination before me is whether the formation of a co-operative society by the respondent under the Co-operative Societies Act and its registration is proper or not. Under sec. 10 of the Co-operative Societies Act only requirements that are necessary for registration are that the members should consist of not less than 10 persons and would have attained the age of majority and that they must reside in the same town or village or in the same group of villages. The counsel for the respondent was unable to show in what way the infringement of sec. 10 of the Cooperative Societies Act has taken place. I thus find that as far as the registration of the respondents into a co-operative societies concerned no illegality has been committed. The next question to determine is whether any infringement of the Rajasthan Allotment of land to Co-operative Societies Rules 1959 has been made. These rules were framed for the purpose of allotment of land to Co-operative Societies on a certain scale and with certain conditions laying out the procedure for allotment of such land. It is true that the co-operative society has to be formed and registered under the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, 1953 as laid down in rule 2(1) which must consist of landless persons of a particular village or who undertake to reside in a village in which the land is to be allowed to the society. There is no doubt that the respondents' society has been prematurely formed and there is nothing to show that the members of the society consist of landless persons, because it is only to the landless persons, who form the co-operative society that land could be allotted under the rules. The question of allotment of land has not yet come up before the appropriate authorities i.e. the Tehsildar and his Advisory Council. It would be open for the members of the respondents' society as well as to the landless persons of the Panchayat Kathawala to apply for allotment of land at the appropriate time to the Tehsildar in Majma-aam and get themselves declared eligible for allotment. It is only after the scrutiny of the eligibility of the members of the society that land could be allotted by the Tehsildar in consultation with the Advisory Council. It is only then that the question of transferring the land by way of allotment after the formation of society would arise. In this case the respondents who have already found themselves into a society as well as the landless persons of the Panchayat Khatawala can claim the right to allotment of land after satisfying the provisions of allotment rules when the time comes. There is nothing wrong if the respondents have already formed themselves into a co-operative society, that does not qualify themselves to an allotment on a priority or preferential basis because in any case the provision of rule 4 and the scrutiny of the eligibility of the landless persons for allotment has to be made out at the time of allotment before any allotment of land could be made to such persons. I, therefore, do not see that any infringement of sec. 10 of the Co-operative Societies Act or Rule 4 of the Allotment of Land Rules, 1959 has been made out by the counsel for the petitioner. The revision petition of the petitioner is, therefore, accordingly rejected.;