Bombay High Court
Bhaskar Mukundrao Danve vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 21 April, 2016
Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala
1 wp 4363.16
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 4363 OF 2016
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION STAMP NO. 13462 OF 2016
Bhaskar S/o Mukundrao Danve,
Age : 46 Years, Occu. : Agriculture,
R/o Chanegaon, Tq. Badnapur,
District Jalna. .. Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through the Secretary for
Co-operation Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2. The Collector Jalna,
District Jalna.
3. The District Deputy Registrar,
Co-operative Societies, Jalna,
District Jalna.
4. The Assistant Registrar,
Co-operative Societies,
Badnapur, Tq. Badnapur,
District Jalna.
5. Chanegaon Vividh Karyakari Seva
Sahkari Society Limited at Chanegaon,
Tq. Badnapur, District Jalna,
Through its Secretary. .. Respondents
::: Uploaded on - 21/04/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 23:14:20 :::
2 wp 4363.16
Shri V. D. Hon, Senior Advocate i/by Shri A. V. Hon, Advocate for
the Petitioner.
Shri B. A. Shinde, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4.
Shri Umakant U. Wagh, Advocate h/f Shri V. B. Jadhav, Advocate
for the Respondent No. 5.
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND
K. K. SONAWANE, JJ.
DATE : 21ST APRIL, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S. V. Gangapurwala, J.) :-
.
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of
parties taken up for final hearing.
2. Mr. Hon, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner
submits that the communication dated 11.04.2016 of the
respondent No. 3 is erroneous and not in consonance with the
provisions of the Statute, so also facts on record. According to
the learned senior counsel, the petitioner was co-opted as
member of the respondent No. 5 society on 14.08.2013. The
respondent No. 5/society had also communicated the said fact to
respondent Nos. 3 and 4, however, no cognizance was taken. The
petitioner on 09.03.2016 filed an application for including his
name in the voters list. The said application was filed as per
Rule 36(12) of the A. P. M. C. Rules. The learned senior counsel
further submits that, the respondents erroneously vide order
dated 11.04.2016 rejected the same. The learned senior counsel
further submits that, the amended rules came into force with
3 wp 4363.16
effect from 30th August, 2014. The same would not be applicable
to the case of the petitioner and the petitioner would be governed
as per the rules prevailing on the date on his co-option. There
was no bar for co-opting the petitioner and the society has rightly
co-opted. According to the learned senior counsel the nomination
paper was filled in and the same is also erroneously rejected.
3. The learned counsel for the respondent No. 5 accepts that
the petitioner was co-opted as member of the Managing
Committee of the respondent No. 5/society on 14.08.2013 in place
of one Mr. Nivrutti Shewale and the said fact was also
communicated to the respondent authorities. According to the
learned counsel, the petitioner was rightly co-opted.
4. Mr. Shinde, the learned Assistant Government Pleader
submits that, Sec. 73(CB) of the Maharashtra Co-operative
Societies Act has been amended with effect from 13.08.2013 and
the said provision would apply. The learned A. G. P. further
submits that, the respondent No. 5/society has not forwarded the
list of members of the Managing Committee. The name of the
petitioner was not included. The order has been rightly passed.
There is no provision for co-option of members. As the
petitioner's name was not appearing in the voters list, his
nomination form is rightly rejected.
4 wp 4363.16
5. We have considered the submissions canvassed by the
learned counsel for respective parties.
6. Rules prevailing as on the date of co-option will have to be
considered on the date of co-option. Rule 56-A(34) and 56-A(35)
of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules were holding the
field. As per the contention of the parties, there was no provision
which states that co-option is not permissible. The society has
clearly stated that the petitioner was co-opted on 14.08.2013. The
learned counsel for the society has accepted that the petitioner
was co-opted. Even the list under the signature of the Secretary
of the society is submitted, which shows that the petitioner was
co-opted as member of the Managing Committee in place of Shri
Nivrutti Shewale.
7. As per Rule 36(12 to 15) of the A. P. M. C. (Development
and Regulation) Rules 1967 even after publication of list of voters
an application can be made to the authority seeking amendment
in the list and the said list can be amended prior to three days of
the last date of filing nomination. Scheme of said Rule 12 to 16
of Rule 36 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing
Rules makes this amply clear.
8. The petitioner had applied well in advance. The last date
for filing nomination as per election programme was 20 th April,
5 wp 4363.16
2016. The petitioner applied for inclusion of his name in the
voters list on 09.03.2016, more than a month prior to the last
date of filing nomination. The application of the petitioner is
rejected on 11.04.2016 and the petitioner has approached this
Court on 13.04.2016 that is much prior to the last date of filing
nomination.
9. Considering the aforesaid aspects of the matter, the
petitioner has made out case for inclusion of his name in the
voters list, so also rejection of his nomination on the ground that
the name of the petitioner not being in the voters list is
erroneous.
10. In the light of the above, we pass following order.
11. The impugned communication dated 11.04.2016 is quashed
and set aside. The order rejecting the nomination of the
petitioner dated 20th April, 2016 on the ground that name of the
petitioner does not appear in the voters list is set aside. The
name of the petitioner be included in the voters list. Rule
accordingly is made absolute in above terms. No costs.
12. The civil application also stands disposed of.
Sd/- Sd/-
[ K. K. SONAWANE, J. ] [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ]
bsb/April 16
