Page No.# 1/5 vs The State Of Assam
2022 Latest Caselaw 4194 Gua

                                                                     Page No.# 1/5

GAHC010130122020




                        THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                           Case No. : WP(C)/3816/2020
         AMITAV PAUL, AGE-50 YEARS,
         S/O- LT. AMULYA PAUL, R/O- VILL- ARAKAPILI, P.O. AND P.S.
         JAMUNAMUKH, DIST.- HOJAI (ASSAM), PIN- 782428

         2: DHANESWAR MEDHI, AGE-44 YEARS,
          S/O- LT. MONORAM MEDHI
          R/O- VILL- BALIRAM GAON
          P.O. AND P.S. JAMUNAMUKH
          DIST. HOJAI (ASSAM)
          PIN- 782428

         3: SUSHIL CH. CHOWDHURY, AGE-50 YEARS,
          S/O- LT. NITYA GOPAL CHOWDHURY
          R/O- VILL- BALIRAM GAON
          P.O. AND P.S. JAMUNAMUKH
          DIST. HOJAI (ASSAM), PIN-782428.
          PIN- 782428

         4: NIZAM UDDIN, AGE-48 YEARS.
          S/O- LT. ABDUL SAMAD
          R/O- VILL- BALIRAM GAON
          P.O. AND P.S. JAMUNAMUKH
          DIST. HOJAI (ASSAM)
          PIN- 782428.

                                       VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM
         REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, CO-
         OPERATION DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-6

         2:THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
         ASSAM, KHANAPARA, GHY-22.

         3:THE ZONAL JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
                                                                             Page No.# 2/5

               GUWAHATI ZONE, BHANGAGARH, GHY-5.

            4:THE DY. REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
             NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 782002,

            5:THE ASSTT. REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
             HOJAI, DIST.- HOJAI, ASSAM, PIN- 782435.

            6:THE CHAIRMAN OF JAMUNAMUKH SOMBAI SOMITI LTD.
             DIST.- HOJAI, ASSAM, PIN- 782428.

            7:THE SECRETARY OF JAMUNAMUKH SOMBAI SOMITI LTD.
             DIST.- HOJAI, ASSAM, PIN- 782428.

Advocate for the Petitioners   : MR. G. UDDIN

Advocate for the Respondents : MR. S. K. TALUKDAR, SC, COOPERATION DEPARTMENT
                               MR. J. ABEDIN, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO. 7.


DATE OF HEARING AND JUDGMENT : 01.11.2022



                                   BEFORE
                  HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

                                          ORDER

01-11-2022 Heard Shri G. Uddin, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Shri S. K. Talukdar, learned Standing Counsel, Cooperation Department representing the Official respondents whereas Shri J. Abedin, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 7.

2. This Court in the last order dated 22.09.2022 had observed that an endeavour would be made to dispose of the writ petition on the next date which is fixed today.

3. Before coming to the issue which requires a determination, the brief facts of the case may be narrated in the following manner.

Page No.# 3/5

4. Four numbers of petitioners have joined together to file this writ petition who claimed to be shareholders of Jamunamukh Samobai Samiti Ltd. in the district of Hojai. They are aggrieved by a voter list containing only 149 eligible voters by contending that there are more than 7000 shareholders. They are also aggrieved by the requirement of payment of Rs.5000/- as membership fee to have such right to vote.

5. Drawing the attention of this Court to the Assam Cooperative Societies Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 2007), Shri G. Uddin, learned counsel for the petitioners has referred to Section 120 which is with regard to savings of existing societies. He contends that the petitioners being existing shareholders, their position is saved by this clause. Attention of this Court has also been drawn to Section 26 (3) of the Act which, amongst others, requires publication of the voters list by affixing on the Notice Board of the Head Office, which the petitioners have alleged to have been violated. The learned counsel further contends that the requirement of deposit of Rs.5000/- as per Section 135 is only applicable to new Members and not to existing shareholders.

6. Per contra, Shri Talukdar, the learned Standing Counsel, Cooperation Department has contended that the projection made by the petitioner is entirely incorrect and untenable in law. He contends that Section 120 of the Act is not applicable in the instant case as the savings are only with regard to the Registration of the Cooperative Societies which were existing at the time of coming of the Act into force in the year 2007. He further disputes that there was no proper publication of the voters list and that there has been violation of the provisions of Section 26(3) of the Act. He contends that apart from hanging the voters list on the Notice Board, the fact of the ensuing election was published as news items and the same was circulated in two newspapers, namely, "Dainik Jugasankha" and "Gana Adhikar" which have wide publicity in the area in question. The learned Standing Counsel further submits that Page No.# 4/5

the requirement of payment of Rs.5000/- as per the Act is a mandatory one to enable oneself to have the voting rights. He further contends that there was no contest at that point of time of publication regarding such requirements.

7. Shri Abedin, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 7 while endorsing the submissions of the learned Standing Counsel further submits that even the antecedents of the petitioners are doubtful and one of the petitioner is not even a Member of the Society in question and the other three are not even shareholders as on date. He, therefore, questions the maintainability of the writ petition itself.

8. The rival contentions made by the learned counsel for the parties have been carefully considered and the materials placed before this Court have been duly examined.

9. Section 120 of the Act is with regard to Savings of existing Societies. The reading of the same Section would bring this Court a conclusion that the same is a Savings Clause only for the purpose of the process of registration of an existing society which was registered under the earlier Act of 1949 and such registered Society would be deemed to be registered under the present Act. The said Savings Clause has nothing to do with the status of the members or the shareholders. The interpretations sought to be given as regards Section 135 of the Act by the petitioners is not acceptable as the requirement of payment of Rs. 5000/- to have the voting rights is the general requirement applicable to all the members after coming of the Act of 2007 into force. The allegation regarding violation of Section 26 (3) of the Act of 2007, apart from being disputed, the learned Standing Counsel, Cooperation Department, as indicated above, has contended that after preparation of the voters list, the news of the ensuing elections were published in two local vernacular newspapers.

10. After taking into consideration, the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that no case for interference has been able to be made out by Page No.# 5/5

the petitioners. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed.

11. No order as to cost.

12. At this stage, it is submitted that elections has not been held for the last about 2 years. In view of that, it is directed that the One Man Committee who is presently running the Cooperative Society shall take all necessary steps to hold the elections within a period of 45 days from today.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant