Case Note & Summary
The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, adjudicated a batch of writ petitions challenging the applicability of the Maharashtra State Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Denotified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Special Backward Category and Other Backward Classes) Act, 2001 to a cooperative society, Jalgaon Zilha Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Sangh. The petitioner society had been under the administration of the National Dairy Development Board from 1995 to 2015 due to mismanagement. Thereafter, an elected committee resumed administration. The respondent union, Jalgaon Zilla Mazdoor Congress Sanghatma, persistently sought implementation of the reservation policy. After earlier writ proceedings and representations, the State Minister for Agriculture passed an order on 8 November 2010 holding that the Reservation Act applied to the society and directing steps to fill backlog vacancies. The Divisional Deputy Registrar issued a letter on 12 June 2018 instructing the society to undertake recruitment by following the reservation roster. The society filed two petitions: one challenging the 2010 ministerial order and another challenging the 2018 letter, seeking a declaration that the Reservation Act did not apply to it. The core legal issue was whether the society fell within the definition of ‘establishment’ under Section 2(c) of the 2001 Act. The society contended that it had no government share capital, was not controlled by the government, and therefore was outside the Act’s purview. The respondents argued that the society had been allotted government land of 9 hectare 65 are and 7 hectare 29 are in 1975 at concessional rates, had received a loan of Rs. 6.25 crore (later repaid) and subsidies, and that a government resolution mandated reservation as a condition of financial aid. They relied on the Explanation to Section 2(c) which includes institutions given government land at concessional rates or any other monetary concessions. The court examined the statutory provisions and the documentary evidence. It found that the petitioner society was allotted government land on two occasions in 1975 and had received financial assistance and subsidies from the government. The court held that the Explanation to Section 2(c) unambiguously brings within the definition of ‘establishment’ any institution that has been given government land at concessional rates or monetary concessions, irrespective of whether the government holds share capital. The society’s arguments based on lack of shareholding were rejected. The court distinguished the precedents cited by the petitioner, noting that they were rendered under different statutes or did not consider the Explanation. The court concluded that the Reservation Act applied to the petitioner society and that it was bound to implement the reservation policy. Consequently, both writ petitions were dismissed, and the society was directed to take immediate steps to fill the backlog of reserved vacancies. The court upheld the impugned ministerial order and the directive of the Deputy Registrar.
Headnote
A) Service Law – Reservation – Applicability to Cooperative Societies – Maharashtra State Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Denotified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Special Backward Category and Other Backward Classes) Act, 2001, Section 2(c) Explanation – The petitioner cooperative society was allotted government land in 1975 and received financial assistance and subsidies, thus falling within the expanded definition of 'establishment' under the Explanation to Section 2(c) – The court held that the Reservation Act applied irrespective of government shareholding, and directed the society to take steps to fill backlog vacancies – Held that the explanation covers institutions receiving government land at concessional rates or monetary concessions, overriding the need for direct shareholding (Paras 14-20).
B) Cooperative Law – Precedents on Reservation – Applicability of Earlier Rulings – The petitioner relied on Madhya Pradesh Rajya Sahakari Bank Maryadit v. State of M.P. (2007) and Daman Singh v. State of Punjab (1985) to argue that reservation does not apply to cooperative societies – The court distinguished those cases as dealing with different statutory provisions and not the Explanation to Section 2(c) of the 2001 Act – Held that those precedents were inapplicable (Paras 12-13, 21).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the provisions of the Maharashtra State Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Denotified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Special Backward Category and Other Backward Classes) Act of 2001 are applicable to the petitioner Co-operative Society?
Final Decision
Both writ petitions are dismissed. The petitioner cooperative society is directed to take immediate steps to fill up the backlog of reserved vacancies in accordance with the reservation policy. The impugned orders dated 08.11.2010 and letter dated 12.06.2018 are upheld.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- Explanation to Section 2(c) expands definition of establishment to include institutions receiving government land at concessional rates or monetary concessions
- irrespective of government shareholding
- cooperative society allotted government land and receiving financial assistance and subsidies falls within purview of Reservation Act
- obligation to implement reservation policy arises upon such receipt of aid
Case Details
2023 LawText (BOM) (10) 258
Writ Petition No. 11138 of 2010 with Writ Petition No. 11431 of 2018 and Writ Petition No. 8204 of 2021
Mangesh S. Patil, Shailesh P. Brahme
Citation not available, 2023:BHC-AUG:24768
Mr. D.K. Thoke, Mr. Vikram A. Pawar, Mr. Pradeep B. Salunke, Mr. S.B. Yawalkar, Mr. P.B. Rakhunde, Mr. Nagraj Janardan Patil
Jalgaon Zilha Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Sangh Maryadit, through Managing Director Ravindra Sadashiv Lahane; The Jalgaon Jilha Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Sangh Ltd., through Managing Director Manoj Gopal Limaye
State of Maharashtra, Divisional Commissioner Nashik Division, Divisional Deputy Registrar Cooperative Societies (Dairy) Nashik Division, Assistant Commissioner Backward Class Cell Nashik Division, Jalgaon Zilla Mazdoor Congress Sanghatma
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Challenge to the applicability of reservation policy to a cooperative society.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought declaration that the Maharashtra State Public Services (Reservation) Act, 2001 does not apply to the cooperative society, and quashing of orders dated 08.11.2010 and letter dated 12.06.2018 directing implementation of reservation and filling of backlog vacancies.
Filing Reason
The petitioner cooperative society was aggrieved by an order of the State Minister for Agriculture dated 08.11.2010 holding that the Reservation Act applies, and by a letter dated 12.06.2018 from the Divisional Deputy Registrar instructing it to fill up backlog vacancies by following the reservation roster.
Previous Decisions
The Minister passed order on 08.11.2010 directing application of Reservation Act and filling of backlog. Earlier, Writ Petition No. 5428 of 2006 filed by respondent union was disposed of with directions to consider representations. Representations to Divisional Commissioner were unsuccessful. The present petitions challenged the 2010 order and 2018 letter.
Issues
Whether the provisions of the Maharashtra State Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Denotified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Special Backward Category and Other Backward Classes) Act of 2001 are applicable to the petitioner Co-operative Society?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that it is not covered by the definition of 'establishment' under Section 2(c) as no share capital is held by the Government; the society is not controlled by the Government; the loan of Rs. 6.25 crore was repaid; it is not a public authority.
Respondents contended that the society was allotted Government land in 1975 at concessional rates; it received financial assistance including loan and subsidies; a Government Resolution mandated reservation as a condition; the Explanation to Section 2(c) covers institutions receiving Government land or monetary concessions; therefore, the Reservation Act applies.
Ratio Decidendi
The Explanation to Section 2(c) of the Maharashtra State Public Services (Reservation for SC/ST/DT/NT/SBC/OBC) Act, 2001 expands the definition of 'establishment' to include institutions that have been granted Government land at concessional rates or any other monetary concessions, irrespective of whether the Government holds share capital. A cooperative society that was allotted Government land and received financial assistance and subsidies falls within this expanded definition and must implement the reservation policy.
Judgment Excerpts
Whether the provisions of the Maharashtra State Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Denotified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Special Backward Category and Other Backward Classes) Act of 2001 ... are applicable to the petitioner – Co-operative Society ?
Explanation. – For the purposes of this clause the expression ‘Government aided institutions” shall also include institutions or industries which have been given either prior to coming into force of this Act or thereafter, aid in the form of Government land at concessional rates or any other monetary concessions by Government, or is recognised, licenced, supervised or controlled by Government
The petitioner-society shall take immediate steps to fill up the backlog of reserved vacancies.
Procedural History
The petitioner cooperative society, registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, suffered losses and was placed under administration of the National Dairy Development Board from 15.09.1995. The administrator period was extended up to 2015, after which an elected committee took over. Respondent No.5, an employees' union, persistently sought application of reservation policy. It filed Writ Petition No. 5428 of 2006 which was disposed of with directions to consider representations. The union then approached the Divisional Commissioner and the State Minister. By order dated 08.11.2010, the Minister held the Reservation Act applicable to the society and directed filling of backlog. The Divisional Deputy Registrar issued a letter on 12.06.2018 to the society to fill backlog vacancies. The petitioner challenged the 2010 order in WP No.11138/2010 and the 2018 letter in WP No.11431/2018. The petitions were clubbed and heard together. WP No.8204/2021 filed by the union for implementation was also heard. The High Court dismissed the petitions and directed the society to implement the reservation policy.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra State Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Denotified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Special Backward Category and Other Backward Classes) Act, 2001: Section 2(c), Section 2(i)
- Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960:
