Disposed

Navnath Ashruba Gholve and Others v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary and Others

Bombay HC17 Feb 2021WP/1752/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court decided writ petitions challenging the exclusion of Vividh Karyakari Societies from the voter list of District Central Co-operative Bank Beed. Finding the Managing Committees were not superseded and Administrators were at fault, the court directed a special meeting to nominate delegates for voting rights, fixing the date for 20.02.2021, while declining to alter the declared election pro

What did the court decide?

Directing Secretaries to issue a 7-day notice for a special meeting on 20.02.2021 to pass resolutions nominating delegates for voting rights in the Federal Society election.

Navnath Ashruba Gholve and Others Vs the State of… — Banking and Recovery | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

(1)

¶2

986-987

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

986 WRIT PETITION NO.1752 OF 2021
WITH CA/1573/2021 IN WP/1752/2021

¶5

NAVNATH ASHRUBA GHOLVE AND OTHERS..PETITIONERS

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS..RESPONDENTS

¶8

Mr. V. D. Salunke, Advocate for the Petitioners.
Mr. D. R. Kale, Incharge GP for Respondents-State.
Mr. S. K. Kadam, Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 and
3.

¶9

Mr. P. D. Bachate h/f Mr. D. S. Bagul, Advocate for
Applicant in CA.

¶10

987 WRIT PETITION NO.1753 OF 2021
WITH CA/1571/2021 IN WP/1753/2021

¶11

VIVIDH KARYAKARI SEVA SAHAKARI SOCIETY LIMITED
PARDI AND OTHERS..PETITIONERS

¶12

VERSUS

¶13

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS..RESPONDENTS

¶14

Mr. V. D. Salunke, Advocate for the Petitioners.
Mr. D. R. Kale, Incharge GP for Respondents-State.
Mr. S. K. Kadam, Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 and
3.

¶15

Mr. D. J. Choudhari, Advocate for Respondent No.4.
Mr. P. D. Bachate h/f Mr. D. S. Bagul, Advocate for
Applicant in CA.

¶16

(2)

¶17

986-987

¶18

 CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
 SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.

¶19

DATED : 17th FEBRUARY, 2021.

¶20

PER COURT:-

¶21

1.At the request of the learned counsel for
the petitioner, leave to amend respondent no.2

¶22

2.The grievance in these petitions is
against the finalization of the voters list without
including the names of the nominees of the
petitioner-Societies to the election of District
Central Co-operative Bank Limited, Beed.

¶23

3.The petitioners in Writ Petition
No.1752/2021 are the members of the respondent
nos.4 to 7-Vividh Karyakari Societies and the
petitioners in Writ Petition No.1753/2021 are
Vividh Karykari Societies and members of the
District Central Co-operative Bank Limited, Beed.
The grievance of these petitioners is that the
voters list is finalized without including the
names of the nominees of the Vivid Karyakari
Societies.

¶24

4.The election programme of the respondent-
DCC Bank, Beed (Federal Society) is declared on
15.02.2021. The programme of the election of the
Federal Bank is reproduced hereunder:

¶25

(3) 986-987

¶26

(4)

¶27

986-987

¶28

5.The petitioners approached this Court much
prior to the publication of the election programme
by filing the present writ petitions wherein
notices are issued.

¶29

6.Writ Petition No.1752/2021 it appears is
filed on 13.01.2021 and Writ Petition No.1753/2021
is filed on 18.01.2021.

¶30

7.The prima dona contention of petitioners
it appears is that the Administrators are appointed
over these Vividhi Karyakari Societies for more
than three to four years, though according to the
Statute Administrator cannot continue for a period
of more than one year. It is the contention of Mr.
Salunke, learned counsel that the term of the
Managing Committee was over, as such the

¶31

(5) 986-987

¶32

Administrator is appointed under Section 73(A). The
Managing Committees are not superseded.

¶33

8.The learned counsel submits that
Administrators failed to conduct the meetings,
though the meetings were called the Administrators
remained absent. The Administrators were the
employee of the Federal Society, as such had
committed all the misdeeds. The enquiry was
conducted. The Authorities issued show cause
notice to Administrators as to why penalty of
Rs.5000/- should not be imposed upon them for their
acts and misdeeds. According to the learned
counsel, it is only the Administrators who can
conduct the meeting. The Administrators failed to
pass the Resolutions. The petitioners are not at
fault. They may be allowed to participate in the
election atleast to the extent of voting rights.

¶34

9.We have also heard Mr. Kadam, learned
counsel for the Election Authority. He submits
that election programme has been declared and now
election programme cannot be changed.

¶35

10.The learned A.G.P. submits that upon
conducting the enquiry it transpired that the
Administrators appointed over these Vividh
Karyakari Societies were guilty of dereliction and
as such show cause notice is issued to them as to
why penalty of Rs.5000/- should not be imposed.
However, the learned A.G.P. submits that the
election process has proceeded further.

¶36

(6)

¶37

986-987

¶38

11.Mr. Bagul, learned counsel for intervenor
submits that petitioners are at fault. The
objections were raised to the provisional voters
list. The objections were rejected in March 2020,
the same has not been challenged. The order has
become final. The Administrators had conveyed
meetings, but as chaos was created by the members
of the Vividh Karyakari Societies the resolutions
could not be passed. The Administrators cannot be
said to be at fault. According to the learned
counsel as per Section 73(C)(A), more particularly,
(1)(F), the petitioners are ineligible even to vote
in the election of the Federal Society being
members of the superseded society. The learned
counsel submits that the petitioners are guilty of
laches on their part. They cannot take the
advantage of their own wrong and now they cannot
participate in the election process.

¶39

12.We have considered the submissions
canvassed by the learned counsel for the respective
parties.

¶40

13.It appears that, the Managing Committees
of these Vividh Karyakari Societies represented by
the petitioners were not superseded, but upon
completion of their term the Administrators are
appointed resorting to Section 77(A) of the
Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. In view of
that, the Clause 73(C)(A)(1)(F)(iii) may not apply.

¶41

(7) 986-987

¶42

The order of supercession of committees as required
under Section 78(A) is not passed.

¶43

14.The Show Cause Notice issued by the
Assistant Registrar to the Administrator is self-
eloquent. The Show Cause Notice states that the
Administrators were intimated by the Divisional
Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Latur
referring to Section 27(10) and Section 73(C)(A)(1)
(i)(F) to pass the Resolution. The Administrators
did not take a meeting within stipulated period.
The Show Cause Notice further states that the
Administrators were required to submit Resolutions
by 12.02.2020, but the said Resolutions were not
passed nor the nominees were intimated vide
Resolutions. The Show Cause Notice sought
explanation from Administrators as to why penalty
of Rs.5000/- should not be imposed upon them. The
report is also given by the Assistant Registrar to
that effect.

¶44

15.We may not rely upon the contentions of
the rival parties because there is word against
word. However, considering the report of the
Authorities prima facie it appears that there was
an act of non-feasance on the part of the
Administrators. Of course, this is not a final
conclusion, but only a prima facie observations on
the basis of the show cause notice and the report.
These observations would not take away the rights
of the Administrators to defend case or any enquiry
that may be initiated against them.

¶45

(8) 986-987

¶46

16.However, as prima facie it appears that
petitioners were not at fault, we have considered
the petitions.

¶47

17.The election programme has been declared
on 15.02.2021. The voting is to take place on
28.03.2021. The election programme is sacrosanct.
The Court should not interfere with the election
programme. The Courts would not stall the election
process. In view of that, we are not considering
the case of petitioners so far as contesting the
elections are concerned.

¶48

18.The voting is to take place on 28.03.2021.
The petitioners had approached this Court much
earlier to the declaration of the election
programme, however, it was only because the
instructions were to be received from the
Government side, the matters were adjourned.
Considering the fact that the petitioners had
approached this Court before the declaration of the
election and that the petitioners cannot be said to
be at fault, more particularly on the basis of the
report of the Government Officers, we would
consider these petitions to the extent of voting
right.

¶49

19.In light of that, we pass the following
order:

¶50

(9)

¶51

986-987

¶52

ORDER

¶53

A.The Resolution is required to be passed in
the General Body / Special General Body
meeting for which the notices are to be
issued. We are told that the Secretaries
of all the Vividh Karyakari Societies
before this Court are functioning. We
direct that the Secretaries of the Vividh
Karyakari Societies (parties to the
present petitions) shall issue notice
calling for the special General Body
meeting. Considering the exigency, seven
days notice shall be given by him
conveying the Special Body Meeting for
passing Resolutions nominating the
delegatee of the Vividh Karyakari
Societies to vote for the election of the
Federal Society. The meeting shall be
presided over by the Assistant Registrar,
Co-operativeSocietiesorhis
representative.

¶54

B. The notice shall be issued for conveying the Special Body Meeting of the Vividh Karyakari Societies (parties to the present petitions) on 20.02.2021.

¶55

C. The Authority of the Co-operative Department shall nominate the Assistant Registrar or its representative to preside over the meeting. The Resolutions may be passed nominating the delegatee of Vividh Karyakari Societies (parties to the petitions) for being a voter to the election of the Federal Society.

¶56

D. We make it clear that, considering the peculiar facts of the case as discussed above, we have passed the present order.

¶57

E. We hope and trust that the Special General

¶58

(10) 986-987

¶59

Body meeting shall be held accordingly.

¶60

F. The Election Authority shall include the name of the delegatee sent to it under the resolution of the Vividh Karyakari Societies as prescribed under the Rules.

¶61

20. Writ Petitions are disposed of. No costs.

¶62

21.In view of disposal of writ petitions,
present civil applications are disposed of.

¶63

(SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA) JUDGE JUDGE

¶64

Devendra/February-2021

Navnath Ashruba Gholve and Others v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Navnath Ashruba Gholve and Others v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kesharbai Nandlal Dhoot and Others Vs Indian Airlines Corporation Ltd. and Others

M/S. Gvpr Engineers Ltd. through P. Uma Shanker the General Manager Legal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Mobin Munavar Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr the Dist Collector Jalna and Others

Bhagwat Kondiba Khedkar and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary and Others

Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Society Limited Pardi and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Arjun Sukhdeo Khedkar and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary and Others