Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Madhukar Mahadev Patil, was an employee of the Sangli Zilla Madhyawarti Sahakari Bank Ltd., a co-operative society. He was terminated from service and filed a dispute under Section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (MCS Act) before the Co-operative Court, seeking reinstatement and compensation. The Co-operative Court dismissed the dispute, and the appeal before the Co-operative Appellate Court was also dismissed. The petitioner then filed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court. During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel fairly conceded that the dispute was covered by the Supreme Court's decision in Maharashtra State Co-operative Housing Finance Corporation Ltd. v. Prabhakar Sitaram Bhadange, which held that service disputes between a co-operative society and its employees are not within the jurisdiction of the Co-operative Court under Section 91 MCS Act. The petitioner sought return of the dispute under Order VII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) for presentation before the Civil Court. The respondent opposed, arguing that the Co-operative Court lacked inherent jurisdiction and thus could not return the plaint, and that Order VII Rule 10 did not apply to Co-operative Courts. The court analyzed the applicability of Order VII Rule 10 to Co-operative Courts, relying on the decision in A-1 Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. v. R. Jaikisan, which held that procedural provisions of CPC apply to Co-operative Courts in the absence of specific rules under the MCS Act. The court distinguished the respondent's reliance on Asif Ahmedally Porbunderwalla, noting that the case involved a suit barred by the Special Court's jurisdiction, whereas here the Co-operative Court had jurisdiction over the class of disputes but not over this specific subject matter. The court held that the Co-operative Court could have returned the dispute under Order VII Rule 10, and this Court, under Article 227, could direct such return. Accordingly, the court allowed the petition, set aside the impugned orders, and directed the Co-operative Court to return the dispute to the petitioner for presentation before the appropriate Civil Court. The court clarified that the merits of the dispute were not adjudicated and that the petitioner could pursue remedies before the Civil Court in accordance with law.
Headnote
A) Co-operative Law - Jurisdiction of Co-operative Court - Service Disputes - Section 91, Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 - The dispute between a co-operative society and its employee regarding termination is not covered under Section 91 of the MCS Act as per the Supreme Court in Maharashtra State Co-operative Housing Finance Corporation Ltd. v. Prabhakar Sitaram Bhadange. The Co-operative Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain such disputes. (Paras 2, 10) B) Civil Procedure - Return of Plaint - Applicability to Co-operative Court - Order VII Rule 10, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - In the absence of a specific procedural rule under the MCS Act or Rules, the Co-operative Court can take recourse to Order VII Rule 10 CPC for returning the dispute for want of jurisdiction. The decision in A-1 Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. v. R. Jaikisan supports this view. (Paras 7-8) C) Civil Procedure - Return of Plaint - Inherent Jurisdiction - Order VII Rule 10, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - The power to return a plaint under Order VII Rule 10 is not limited to cases of territorial or pecuniary jurisdiction; it can also be exercised when the court lacks inherent jurisdiction over the subject matter. The contrary view in Asif Ahmedally Porbunderwalla was distinguished. (Paras 10, 13-14, 16) D) Constitutional Law - Supervisory Jurisdiction - Article 227, Constitution of India - This Court, in exercise of its powers under Article 227, can direct the return of the dispute to the Civil Court, as the Co-operative Court lacked jurisdiction and the petitioner is entitled to pursue remedies before the appropriate forum. (Paras 17-18)
Issue of Consideration
Whether this Court can exercise powers under Order VII Rule 10 of CPC to return the dispute filed by the petitioner in the Co-operative Court under Section 91 of the MCS Act for presenting it before the Civil Court.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The impugned judgment and order of the Co-operative Appellate Court and the order of the Co-operative Court are set aside. The Co-operative Court is directed to return the dispute to the petitioner for presentation before the appropriate Civil Court. The petitioner is at liberty to pursue remedies before the Civil Court in accordance with law. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Jurisdiction of Co-operative Court under Section 91 MCS Act does not extend to service disputes between co-operative society and its employees
- Order VII Rule 10 CPC applies to Co-operative Court in absence of specific procedural rule
- Return of plaint permissible even if court lacks inherent jurisdiction
- Article 227 powers can be used to direct return of dispute.
