Trimbak Gopalrao Ghogare And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr Its ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 2177 Bom

                                    1                  WP.1878-21+1.odt

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                        WRIT PETITION NO.1878 OF 2021

     1.      Sahebrao S/o Keshavrao Deshmukh,
             Age : 51 years, Occu. Agri. & Chairman of
             Jaibhavani Dhanya Adhikosh Seva Sahakari
             Sanstha, Ltd., Sonna,
             R/o. Sonna, Tq. and District Parbhani.

     2.      Dattarao s/o Shankarrao Shinde,
             Age : 50 years, Occu. Agri. & Chairman of
             Ashtyavinayak Dhanya Adhikosh Seva Sahakari
             Sanstha, Ltd., Narsapur,
             R/o. Narsapur, Tq. and District Parbhani.

     3.      Gajanan S/o Prabhakar More,
             Age : 57 years, Occu. Agri. & Chairman of
             Sai Dhanya Adhikosh Seva Sahakari
             Sanstha, Ltd., Shahapur,
             R/o. Shahapur, Tq. and District Parbhani.

     4.      Sau. Manda Rameshrao Deshmukh,
             Age : 52 years, Occu. Agri. & Chairman of
             Trimurti Dhanya Adhikosh Seva Sahakari
             Sanstha, Ltd., Nagapur,
             R/o. Nagapur, Tq. and District Parbhani.

     5.      Suresh S/o Bapursaheb Deshmukh,
             Age : 55 years, Occu. Agri. & Chairman of
             Parvati Dhanya Adhikosh Seva Sahakari
             Sanstha, Ltd., Parbhani,
             R/o. Parbhani, Tq. and District Parbhani.

     6.      Uttam S/o Govindrao Deshmukh,
             Age : 45 years, Occu. Agri. & Chairman of
             Shanbho Mahadev Dhanya Adhikosh Seva Sahakari
             Sanstha, Ltd., Zadgaon,
             R/o. Zadgaon, Tq. and District Parbhani.




::: Uploaded on - 05/02/2021                  ::: Downloaded on - 05/02/2021 23:45:56 :::
                                     2                   WP.1878-21+1.odt

     7.      Maina Narayan Ballal,
             Age : 45 years, Occu. Agri. & Chairman of
             Baliraja Dhanya Adhikosh Seva Sahakari
             Sanstha, Ltd., Sahajpur Jawala,
             R/o. Sahajpur Jawala, Tq. and District Parbhani.

     8.      Vinod S/o Sakharamji Deshmukh,
             Age : 51 years, Occu. Agri. & Chairman of
             Deokrupa Dhanya Adhikosh Seva Sahakari
             Sanstha, Ltd., Lohagaon,
             R/o. Lohagaon, Tq. and District Parbhani. ... Petitioners

                      Versus

     1.      The State of Maharashtra,
             Through its Secretary of Co-operative and
             Textile Department, Mantralaya,
             Mumbai - 32.

     2.      The State Co-operative Election Authority,
             Maharashtra State Pune.

     3.      The District Co-operative Election Officer of the
             Parbhani District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd.,
             Parbhani @ Divisional Joint Registrar Co-operative
             Societies, Aurangabad.

     4.      The Managing Director,
             Parbhani District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd.,
             Parbhani, Tq. and District Parbhani.     ... Respondents

                                     ...
     Mr. V. A. Bagal, Advocate for Petitioners.
     Mr. S. P. Deshmukh, AGP for Respondent-State.
     Mr. S. K. Kadam, Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 and 3.
     Mr. M. S.Deshmukh, Advocate for Respondent No.4.
                                     ...

                        WRIT PETITION NO.1877 OF 2021

     1.      Trimbak S/o Gopalrao Ghogare,
             Age : 48 years, Occu. Agri.




::: Uploaded on - 05/02/2021                   ::: Downloaded on - 05/02/2021 23:45:56 :::
                                    3                    WP.1878-21+1.odt

             Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari
             Society Ltd., Suppa (G),
             R/o. Borda, Tq. Gangakhed,
             District Parbhani.

     2.      Balasaheb S/o Trimbakrao Mundhe,
             Age : 46 years, Occu. Agri.
             Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari
             Society Ltd., Borda,
             R/o. Borda, Tq. Gangakhed,
             District Parbhani.

     3.      Dyaneshwar S/o Kachru Tathe,
             Age : 42 years, Occu. Agri. & Chairman of
             Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari
             Society Ltd., Maletakli, Tq. Selu,
             District Parbhani.                        ... Petitioners
                      Versus
     1.      The State of Maharashtra,
             Through its Secretary of Co-operative and
             Textile Department, Mantralaya,
             Mumbai - 32.

     2.      The State Co-operative Election Authority,
             Maharashtra State Pune.

     3.      The District Co-operative Election Officer of the
             Parbhani District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd.,
             Parbhani @ Divisional Joint Registrar Co-operative
             Societies, Aurangabad.

     4.      The Managing Director,
             Parbhani District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd.,
             Parbhani, Tq. and District Parbhani.     ... Respondents
                                     ...
     Mr. V. A. Bagal, Advocate for Petitioners.
     Mr. K. B. Jadhavar, AGP for Respondent-State.
     Mr. V. H. Dighe, Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 and 3.
     Mr. M. S. Deshmukh, Advocate for Respondent No.4.
                                     ...




::: Uploaded on - 05/02/2021                   ::: Downloaded on - 05/02/2021 23:45:56 :::
                                        4                     WP.1878-21+1.odt


                               CORAM       : V. K. JADHAV, J.

                               DATE        : 03.02.2021.

     ORDER :-

1. Heard finally at admission stage by consent of the

parties.

2. By way of present Writ Petitions, the petitioners

challenging the order dated 15.01.2021 passed by respondent

No.3, thereby the objection filed by the petitioners have been

rejected and thereby the names of the petitioners societies are

not included in the final voter list of respondent No.4 /

Parbhani District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. (herein after

referred to as 'respondent No.4 / Bank').

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

petitioners are the Co-operative Societies registered under the

provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960

and Rules, 1961 (herein after referred to as the 'Societies Act,

1960'). The petitioners socieities are working in the territorial

jurisdiction of respondent No.4 / Bank. The learned counsel

submits that the petitioners societies have filed an application /

proposal on 09.03.2016 seeking membership of respondent

5 WP.1878-21+1.odt

No.4 / Bank along with all the necessary documents. However,

respondent No.4 / Bank has not taken any decision on the

above mentioned proposal / application filed by the petitioners

for seeking membership, therefore, in the primary voter list of

respondent No.4 / bank, the petitioners societies' names are

not included. The learned counsel submits that the petitioners

socieities remained unrepresented in the ensuing elections of

respondent No.4 / Bank. The learned counsel submits that

without considering the above mentioned facts and legal

position, respondent No.3 by its impugned order dated

15.01.2021 rejected the applications / objections filed by the

petitioners. The learned counsel submits that respondent No.3

has failed to consider the mandate of Section 22(2) of the

Societies Act, 1960.

4. The learned counsel, Mr. S. K. Kadam for respondent

Nos.2 and 3 submits that in terms of the provisions of Section

27(3) of the Societies Act, 1960, the period of three years

provided in Section 27 Sub Section (3) of the Societies Act,

1960 is to be counted from the date of investment of the

shares. In the instant case, the petitioners socieities have

invested their funds in the share capital of respondent No.4 /

6 WP.1878-21+1.odt

Bank on 20.05.2017. The learned counsel Mr. Kadam submits

that the said period of three years is to be counted till

06.05.2020 and as such the period of three years is not

completed on the said date, the Returning Officer has

therefore, rightly rejected the objection raised by the

petitioners.

5. I have also heard the learned AGP for the respondent /

State and learned counsel Mr. M. S. Deshmukh for respondent

No.4 / Bank.

6. Though the petitioners socieities have filed an

application / proposal for seeking membership of respondent

No.4 / bank on 09.03.2016, however, the petitioners socieities

have purchased the share capital for membership of

respondent No.4 / bank on 20.05.2017.

7. The provisions of Section 27 of the Societies Act, 1960

speak about voting powers of the members. Sub Sections (3)

and (3A) of Section 27 of the Societies Act, 1960 are relevant

for deciding the issue raised in the present writ petitions.

Thus, Sub Sections (3) and (3A) of Section 27 of the Societies

Act, 1960 are reproduced herein below :-

                                          7                     WP.1878-21+1.odt


             "27.     Voting powers of members.

            (1) .....
            (2) .....

(3) A society which has invested any part of its funds in the shares of any federal society, may appoint one of its active members to vote on its behalf in the affairs of that federal society; and accordingly such member shall have the right to vote on behalf of the society:

Provided that, any new member society of a federal society shall be eligible to vote in the affairs of that federal society only after the completion of the period of three years from the date of its investing any part of its fund in the shares of such federal society:

(3A) An individual member of a society shall not be eligible for voting in the affairs of that society for a period of two years from the date of his enrollment as a member of such society:

Provided that, nothing in this sub-section shall apply in respect of a co-operative housing society and a co-operative premises society."

8. Thus, from bare reading of Section 27(3) and the

proviso thereof, it is clear that the condition for eligibility of a

member to vote in the affairs of a federal socieity is completion

of three years from the date of its investing any part of its

8 WP.1878-21+1.odt

funds in the shares of such federal society. So far as Sub

Section (3A) is concerned, there is marked difference between

a member of society and an individual member of the society.

The individual member of the socieity is not eligible for voting

in the affairs of the federal society for a period of two years

from the date of its enrollment as a member of the society,

whereas in case of member of society is concnerned, the

completion of period of three years is required to be computed

from the said date of investment.

9. In the case of Dudhganga Vikas Seva Sanstha Maryadit

Vs. Distt. Collector, Kolhapur and others, reported in (2006) 5

SCC 250 relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioners,

in para Nos. 7 and 8, the Supreme Court has made following

observations:-

"7. A mere reading of section 27 makes it explicit that a society, which has invested any part of its fund in the shares of a federal society, may appoint one of its members to vote on its behalf in the affairs of the federal society. Proviso to sub-section (3) of Section 27 of the Act lays down the condition of eligibility which is to the effect that any new member of a federal society shall be eligible to vote in the affairs of the federal society only after the completion of the

9 WP.1878-21+1.odt

period of 3 years from the date of its investing any part of its fund in the shares of such federal society. We may also note sub-section (3-A) of Section 27 of the Act which relates to an individual member of a society. In his case it is provided that he shall not be eligible for voting in the affairs of that society for a period of two years from the date of his enrollment as a member of such society. The legislature has consciously employed in sub-sections (3) and (3-A) words which are of significance. In the proviso to sub-section (3) the period of 3 years is reckoned from the date of the society investing any part of its fund in the shares of a federal society, whereas sub-section (3-A) provides that the period of 2 years shall be computed from the date of enrollment of an individual as a member of such federal society.

8. Having regard to the plain words used in Section 27(3) of the Act, the appellant Society having invested its fund in the shares of Kolhapur District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Respondent 2 herein on 30-12-2002, it became eligible to vote in the affairs of the federal society after 30-12-2005. We are informed that the date of investment by the appellant Society and its enrollment as a member of the federal society is the same, namely, 30-12-2002. Ex facie, therefore, in terms of Section 27(3) of the Act, in April 2006 when the election was due to be held, the appellant Society was entitled to appoint one of its members to vote on its behalf in the affairs of the federal society Respondent 2, having completed the

10 WP.1878-21+1.odt

period of 3 years from the date of its investment in shares of Respondent 2 society on 30-12-2005."

10. In the case of Dhule Gramin Vikas Bhajipala Phal

Phalawal Va Phule Kharedi Vikri Sahakari Sanstha Ltd. and

others Vs. State of Maharashtra and others, reported in 2007

(5) ALL MR 867, relied upon by the learned counsel for the

petitioners, the Division Bench of this Court, by referring the

observations made by the Supreme Court in the case above i.e.

Dudhganga Vikas Seva Sanstha Maryadit (supra) , in para 18 of

the judgment has made following observations:-

"18. We find from perusal of the provisions of Section 27(3) of the Act, 1960 that there is no ambiguity in its application. Considering the interpretation put up by the Apex Court and the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in their judgment to the provisions of Section 27 of the Act read with Rule 4 of the Committee Rules it can be safely held that the members society of the federal society shall be eligible to vote in the affairs of the federal society after completion of period of three years from the date of its investing funds in the shares of the federal society."

11. In the case of Amrutdhara Dudh Utpadak Sahakari

Sanstha and Another Vs. The State of Maharshtra and others ,

11 WP.1878-21+1.odt

reported in 2012 (3) ALL MR 850, relied upon by the learned

counsel for the petitioners, the learned Single Judge of this

court (Coram : S. V. Gangapurwala, J.) in para 10 of the

judgment has made the following observations:-

"10. Even sub section (3) of Section 27 of the said Act lays down that the society which has invested any part of its funds in the shares of the federal society, may appoint any of its members to vote on its behalf in the affairs of that federal society. The said sub section (3) of Section 27 of the said Act does not warrant that a specific membership has to be conferred on the society. It only mandates that the said Society should have invested any part of its funds in the shares of any federal society. In the present case, none of the respondents dispute the fact that the petitioners have invested part of their funds in the shares of the respondent no.4 -Society. The only embargo put on the rights of such a Society to vote is that it should have completed three (3) years from the date of its investing any part of its funds in the share of any federal society in view of proviso (3) to Section 27. In the present case, the petitioners have invested their part of the funds in the shares of respondent no.4 in the year 2002. Even the said restriction laid down in proviso would not apply in this case."

12 WP.1878-21+1.odt

12. In view of the above and considering the relevant

provisions and the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court and

the Division Bench of this Court and also the Single Judge of

this Court, I do not find any error in the impugned order

passed by the Respondent / Returning Officer in rejecting the

objections raised by the petitioners socieities. There is no

substance in both the Writ petitons. Hence, I proceed to pass

the following order :

ORDER

Both the Writ Petitions are hereby dismissed.

(V. K. JADHAV, J.) ...

vmk/-