- (1.) THESE nine writ petitions have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 14.6.1994 passed by the State Government in exercise of the powers conferred under section 139 of the Rajasthan Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Act") curtailing the period of exemption under section 36(1-B) of the Act from the period of one year to 15.6.1994 or till new election,whichever is earlier, and the order dated 15.6.1994 passed by the Registrar, Cooperative Societies Rajasthan, Jaipur under Section 36(1-B) of the Act appointing District Magistrate as Administrator for a period of one year or till the new elections of the Board of Directors of Zila Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd. of various districts. In all the above 9 petitions, order dated 14.6.1994 passed by the State Government and the order dated 15.6.1994 passed by the Registrar, Cooperative Societies Rajasthan, Jaipur have been challenged and the date of the orders in all the writ petitions is same.
(2.) SINCE the question involved in the above noted writ petitions is similar, they have been heard togather for the purpose of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Advocate General Rajasthan, appearing for the State and the learned counsel for other respondents. For the purpose of deciding the controversy involved in these petitions, in my opinion it is not necessary to narrate the facts of all the cases as they are almost identical, but for knowing the nature of controversy, the facts as unfolded in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3674/94 are being enumerated. In short, the facts are that Sawaimadhopur-Tonk Zila Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd., Sawaimadhopur is a duly registered Cooperative Society registered under the provisions of the Act. Petitioner Laxmi Narain Swami is a member of the Board of Directors of the respondent Sangh and was elected as such on 24.8.1990 along with 8 other members. He was subsequently elected as Chairman of the Sangh on 25.8.1990. According to Bye-law No. 19(2) of the registered Bye-lows of the sangh, the term of elected Board of Directors is 3 years. Bye-law No.l9(2) runs as under: *** Rule 34(2) of the Rajasthan Cooperative Societies Rules, 1966 (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Rules") provides that the members of the committee shall continue in office for such period as may be specified in the bye-laws and since bye-law No.l9(2) of the Sangh prescribes the term as 3 years, there is no manner of doubt that the petitioners term as Director was for a period of 3 years i.e.from 24.8.1990 till 24.8.1993. Section 36(1-B) of the Act provides for the provision of appointment of administrator to manage the affairs of the society for a period not exceeding two years or till a new committee is constituted, whichever is earlier. Since the controversy involved in these writ petitions is squarely relates to section 36(1-B) of the Act, it appears proper to quote the aforesaid section in extenso, which runs as under "36(1-B) If, before the expiry of the term of the committee as specified in the bye-laws, a new committee is not constituted, the Registrar may appoint a Government servant as administrator to manage the affairs of the society for a period not exceeding one year or till a new committee is constituted, whichever is earlier. Explanation: A member of the committee for which an administrator is appointed under this sub-section shall not be deemed to be disqualified under sub-section (7) of section 34." Section 139 of the Act and Rule 110 of the Rules have empowered the State Government to grant exemption to any co-operative society or any class of societies from any of the provisions of this Act by general or special order. Section 139 of the Act runs as under: "The Government may, by general or special order, exempt any co- operative society or any class of societies from any of the provisions of this Act or may direct that such provisions shall apply to such society or class of societies with such modifications as may be specified in the order."
(3.) RULE 110 of the RULEs runs as under: "RULE 110- Power to exempt from rules: The Government may by general or special order, exempt any society or any class of societies from any of the provisions of the rules or may direct that such provisions shall apply to such society or class of societies with such modifications and on conditions as may be specified in the order." From the facts stated above, it is abundantly clear that the term of the elected Board of Directors of the Sangh was to expire on 23.8.1993 and it is alleged that since the State Government was not in a position to hold elections of the Board of Directors of the Sangh, before expiry of the term in the State Government issued two orders dated 24.8.1993 in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 139 of the Act and Rule 110 of the Rules,by which the State Government exempted the Primary Milk Producers Cooperative Societies and District Cooperative Dairy Unions from the provisions of Section 36(1-B) of the Act and rule 34(2) and (6) of the Rules for one year or such time till the elections are held, whichever is earlier. Copies of the aforesaid two orders issued under section 139 of the Act and Rule 110 of the Rules have been enclosed with the writ petition as Annexures 1 and 2. A perusal of the orders dated 24.8.1993, Annexures 1 and 2 shows that Primary Milk Producers Cooperative Societies and District Cooperative Dairy Unions were exempted from the provisions of section 36(1-B) and Rule 24(2) and (6) for one year or such time till the elections are held, whichever is earlier. From the aforesaid two annexures, it is apparent that though the term of the elected body of the Sangh came to an end on 23.8.1993, the said body could function by virtue of exemption granted by order dated 14.6.1994, till 23.8.1994. It has also been alleged that the order dated 24.8.1993 passed by the State Government under Section 139 of the Act and Rule 110 of the Rules was modified by order dated 14.6.1994, according to which the State Government exempted the District Cooperative Dairy Unions from the provisions of Section 36(1-B) of the Act only up to 15.6.1994, meaning thereby that the period of one year as mentioned in the order dated 24.8.1993 was curtailed and was to in force till 15.6.1994 only and the orders impugned in these writ petitions were issued by the Registrar, Cooperative Societies on 15.6.1994 appointing administrators for a period of one year or till new elections for the societies are held. The petitioner feeling aggrieved against the orders dated 14.6.1994 and 15.6.1994 issued by the State Government and the Registrar, Cooperative Societies Rajasthan, Jaipur separately has approached this court for issuance of writ of certiori for quashing the aforesaid orders. The petitioner has also filed an application for grant of interim relief to the effect that the operation of the orders dated 14.6.1994(Annexures 3 and 4) issued by the State Government and the order dated 15.6.1994 issued by the Registrar Cooperative Societies Rajasthan, Jaipur may be stayed and the elected Board of Directors of the Sangh may be allowed to look after the affairs of the Sangh till the disposal of the writ petition. Caveat has been filed on behalf of the State of Rajasthan and reply to the stay application filed by the petitioner has been filed on behalf of the contesting respondents, in which the main plea raised by the respondents, is that the impugned order dated 15.6.1994 passed by the Registrar, Cooperative Societies has already been given effect to and the District Magistrate, Sawaimad-hopur has already assumed charge on 16.6.1994 and as such the petitioner was not entitled to grant of any interim relief. In the reply filed by the respondents to the stay application,certain facts have been mentioned by way of additional , pleas. To my mind certain facts mentioned therein appear to be relevant for the purposes of understanding the scheme/conslitution/election of the Cooperative Societies relating to the milk in the State of Rajasthan and as such some of the facts narrated in the reply are extracted. There are three type of cooperative Societies relating to milk in the State of Rajasthan, namely (1) Primary Milk Producers Cooperative Society Ltd., (2) District Milk Producers Cooperative Unions and (3) the Rajasthan Cooperative Dairy Faderation. The members of such Primary Cooperative Societies elect their management committee and according to its bye-laws the term of the elected Managing Committee is three years. Persons elected to the Management Committee are generally known as the Members of the Managing Committee and they elect one of them as Chairman. The Chairman of such Primary Milk Producers Cooperative Societies, which are operative in the area of District Cooperative Milk Producers Union, elect the Managing Committee of such Union and the members so elected in turn elect one of them as the Chairman of the Managin Committee of the Union and generally this management of the committee is called the Board of Directors. Such Unions, some times are for more than one Revenue Districts also, and in Rajasthan, the member of such unions is 16.The elections to constitute the Managing Committee of the Primary Milk Producers Cooperative Societies were held in December, 1988 and their term had expired in December, 1991. The Board of Directors in the District Milk Cooperative Unions were fully constituted by August, 1991 except in one district where the District Milk Cooperative Union, the Board of Directors was constituted on 31.5.1991. Thus the elections for the constitution of Primary Milk Producers Cooperative Society Ltd. in the State of Rajasthan as well as District Unions ought to have been held on or before or soon after the expiry of their term. However, for one reason or the other, the same could not be held because of certain amendments which were considered proper regarding the constitution of the Managing Committee. One such amendment was made in section 33 by the Rajasthan Cooperative Societies (Amendment) Act,1992 (Act No.2 of 1992 ). Since the elections of the Primary Milk Producers Cooperative Societies were not held, it was not possible to hold elections of the District Milk Cooperative Unions also. It has been stated that in view of the aforesaid facts, the State Government issued orders dated 24.8.1993. It has also been stated by the respondents that after the elected Government took over the administration of Rajasthan on 4.12.1993, its attention was invited about holding of elections and after deliberations of the whole matters at various levels, a decision was taken by the Government to hold such elections and further it was also considered proper by the Government that with a view to ensure free and fair elections, the extended term of the District Milk Cooperative Union be also modified so as to confine the period upto the limited time in all the 16 milk cooperative unions and it is in this back-ground that the extended period was curtailed by' order dated 14.6.1994 till 15.6.1994 and it has been alleged that since the extended period thad already expired on 14.6.1994, the Registrar invoked his powers under section 36(1-B) of the Act and appointed Administrators in all the Union by order dated 15.6.1994. ;