High Court Allows Writ Petition in Cooperative Society Reserved Seat Election Dispute. Court Holds Section 73B(3) and Rule 20 Do Not Require Society Nomination for Eligible Individual or Elected Member to Contest Reserved Seat.

Case Note & Summary

By way of a writ petition, the petitioner, a retired individual and elected member of the committee of respondent No.4 society, challenged the judgment and order dated 03.12.2024 passed by the Maharashtra State Cooperative Appellate Court, Mumbai, Bench at Nagpur in Appeal No.27/2024, which had set aside the earlier order of the Co-operative Court, Amravati dated 19.03.2024 in Dispute No.71/2022. The dispute arose out of an election to a reserved seat on the committee of the Amravati District Urban Cooperative Bank Association Ltd. Respondent No.4 society had challenged the petitioner's election on the ground that his name was not recommended or nominated by the member society. The Co-operative Court had dismissed the election dispute, holding that under Section 73B of the Maharashtra Co-Operative Societies Act, 1960 read with Rule 20 of the Maharashtra Co-Operative Societies (Election to Committee) Rules, 2014, the petitioner was eligible. In appeal, the Maharashtra State Co-operative Appellate Court reversed that view, holding that unless an individual member is appointed or nominated by the society by passing a resolution, he cannot contest election for a reserved seat. The core legal issue before the High Court was whether Section 73B(3) of the Act of 1960 and Rule 20 of the Rules of 2014 require an individual member of a society or an elected member of the committee of a member society to obtain a recommendation or nomination from the member society before contesting a reserved seat. Mr. Mirza, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner, being an elected member of the committee of respondent No.4 member society, was eligible under Section 73B(3) to contest the election from a reserved seat and that no separate recommendation or nomination by the member society was necessary. The respondents and the learned Assistant Government Pleader supported the appellate court's finding that an individual member must be appointed or nominated by the society by passing a resolution. The High Court examined Section 73B of the Maharashtra Co-Operative Societies Act, 1960, particularly sub-section (3), which states that any individual member of the society or any elected member of the committee of a member society belonging to the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, De-notified Tribes, Nomadic Tribes or Special Backward Classes shall be eligible to contest the election to a reserved seat. The court found no ambiguity in the provision and held that it does not remotely suggest that such a person requires recommendation of the member society. Once a person is eligible to contest, the next stage is nomination, governed by Rule 20 of the Rules of 2014. Rule 20(1) provides that any member whose name appears in the final list of voters may be nominated as a candidate if qualified, and its first proviso expressly states that where seats are reserved under Section 73B or 73C, any individual member of the society or any member of the committee of a member society, whether elected, co-opted or nominated, shall be eligible for being nominated as a candidate. Rule 20(3) further permits any person whose name is entered in the final list of voters to propose or second a nomination. The court therefore concluded that the appellate court's insistence on a society resolution nominating the candidate ran contrary to the election rules. The petitioner, being an elected member of the committee of respondent No.4 society, was eligible to contest and be nominated; there was no dispute that his nomination was in accordance with the rules. Consequently, the appellate court's finding was unsustainable. The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed and set aside the appellate court's judgment and order dated 03.12.2024 in Appeal No.27/2024, restored the Co-operative Court's judgment and order dated 19.03.2024 in Dispute No.71/2022, made the Rule absolute, and directed no order as to costs.

Headnote

Issue of Consideration

Final Decision

The writ petition was allowed. The judgment and order dated 03.12.2024 passed by the Maharashtra State Cooperative Appellate Court, Mumbai, Bench at Nagpur in Appeal No.27/2024 was quashed and set aside. The judgment and order dated 19.03.2024 passed by the Co-operative Court, Amravati in Dispute No.71/2022 was restored. Rule was made absolute. No order as to costs.

Law Points