CHHOTELAL PANNALAL NAGAR Vs. D M INDORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition which purports to be under Article 226/227 of the constitution of India by the above named petitioner for an appropriate writ or order to be issued against the respondents regarding the termination of his membership from the Board of Directors of the respondent No. 16 the Indore paraspar Sahakari Bank Ltd. , Indore. Equivalent Citation:

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts alleged by the petitioner in the petition are these: the petitioner is an elected member of the Board of Directors of the respondent-Bank (The Indore Paraspar Sahakari Bank Ltd.), a bank constituted under the M. P. Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). The petitioner was detained under the maintenance of Internal Security Act by the District Magistrate, indore, the respondent No. 1. The remaining respondents Nos. 2 to 15 were aware of this detention while under detention, the petitioner could not attend any meeting of the Board of Directors unless permitted by the District Magistrate. In these circumstances, the petitioner while under detention forwarded applications to the Board of Directors for leave of absence, These applications were allowed but subsequently on 5-4-1976 (?) the respondents informed vide Bank manager's letter that leave of absence from the Board's meeting could not be granted. The respondents, in these circumstances, illegally terminated the membership of the petitioner under the Bank's byelaw no. 43 (1) vide the Manager's letter dated 20-4-1976. The petitioner's membership from the Board of Directors, in these circumstances, was brought to an end illegally. The petitioner, therefore, prays that any appropriate writ or order may be issued against the members of the Board of Directors to the effect that the termination of the membership is illegal and that he may be treated as continuing as Member of the Board.

(3.) IN the return filed by the District Magistrate it is stated that the petitioner's detention under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act was legal and that the district Magistrate has no information regarding the other allegations made in the petition relating to the termination of his membership from the Board of directors. Respondents Nos. 2 to 7 and 12 to 15 who were then the members of the Board of Directors of the Bank resisted the claim made by the petitioner on the ground that leave of absence from July 8, 1975 to March 12, 1976 was granted to the petitioner, that further leave of absence was not thought proper in the interest of the management of the bank and it was refused, that under the bye-laws of the bank continuous absence for more than five meetings without leave of absence automatically led to the consequence of the termination of membership of the absent member, that considering the interest of the management of the bank leave of absence though applied for by the petitioner was refused, that between March 12, 1976 and April 16, 1976 the petitioner remained absent without leave for five consecutive meetings, 'hence under bye-law 43 (1) the petitioner's membership from the Board automatically came to an end, that these respondents did not take any undue advantage of the petitioner's detention under the provisions of the Maintenance of Internal security Act, that these respondents acted in accordance with the bye-laws and in the interest of the better management of the bank, that the office of the board of Directors is not a statutory office and the Board cannot be said to be performing any statutory function, that no writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ could be issued against a bank, a private body, that even for the prayer for a writ of mandamus, the petitioner has not, be fore filing the present petition, made any demand of justice, that the petitioner could not equivalent Citation: prosecute the present petition without joining the bank as one of the respondents and that the petition filed against the Directors in their individual capacity was not maintainable.