Case Note & Summary
These two writ petitions concerned a challenge to orders passed by the District Co-operative Society Election Officer dated 20 September 2021. The petitioner, a claimed voter of Satara District Central Co-operative Bank, challenged the Election Officer's direction to include the names of two nominated members in the final voters list for elections to the bank's managing committee. The central legal issue was whether the federal society, the bank, had authority while preparing a provisional voters list to decide the legality of membership of a nominee from a member society and exclude that nominee. The factual background began with the end of the bank's managing committee term on 6 May 2020. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, elections were delayed. On 11 February 2021, the Election Officer issued a programme for preparation of voters list, and the member societies submitted resolutions nominating their representatives on 18 February 2021. After further deferment, a fresh programme was notified on 13 August 2021. The petitioner objected to the inclusion of respondent no.5 by letter dated 4 August 2021, asserting that these nominees were not members of their parent societies, lacked land in the operational area, and their nominations were bogus. The bank's General Manager and Deputy Manager conducted an ex-parte inquiry through Divisional Development Officers and prepared a report dated 18 August 2021 stating that respondent no.5 were not members of their societies and should be excluded under Rule 10 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies (Election to Committee) Rules, 2014. Consequently, the bank omitted their names from the provisional voters list published on 3 September 2021. Respondent no.5 filed objections on 13 September 2021, contending that they were validly nominated and that the bank lacked authority to determine their membership status. The bank replied on 15 September 2021 reiterating its reasons. The Election Officer, by the impugned order, upheld the objections of respondent no.5. He held that the member societies had passed valid resolutions nominating them, and the bank's act of deletion was without jurisdiction. He further observed that he himself lacked jurisdiction as an Election Officer to adjudicate inter-se membership disputes between the nominees and their societies, but he directed inclusion of their names in the final voters list. In the writ petitions, respondent nos.2 and 3 filed reply affidavits supporting the impugned order, stating that under Rule 9(1) the bank had no authority to delete names of delegates/representatives of member societies and that the bank's decision was not in consonance with the Rules. The available judgment text ends during the narration of these reply affidavits and does not include the final operative directions of the High Court. Based on the reasoning discernible, the court was examining whether the federal society and the Election Officer had jurisdiction to exclude or adjudicate membership at the voters list stage. The rule position indicated that only the member society's resolution of nomination is the relevant document at that stage, and disputes regarding membership status must be resolved before a competent authority, not through the election process.
Headnote
A) Co-operative Societies - Election to Committee - Federal Society's Jurisdiction - Maharashtra Co-operative Societies (Election to Committee) Rules, 2014, Rules 9, 10, 11 - During preparation of provisional voters list for election to managing committee of a federal society, the federal society has no authority to decide legality of membership of a member nominated by its member society so as to exclude the nominee. The bank, based on an ex-parte inquiry and reports of Divisional Development Officers, excluded respondent no.5 from provisional voters list. The Election Officer held this action without jurisdiction. Held that such exclusionary decision was ultra vires the federal society's powers under the Election to Committee Rules (Paras 2, 8-9). B) Co-operative Societies - Election to Committee - Election Officer's Jurisdiction - Maharashtra Co-operative Societies (Election to Committee) Rules, 2014, Rule 11 - The Election Officer also lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate inter-se membership disputes between the nominated member and the primary society. The Election Officer observed that even he could not decide such membership issues in the capacity of an Election Officer; however, because the bank's deletion of respondent no.5 was without jurisdiction, he directed inclusion of their names in the final voters list. Held that the nomination resolutions by the member societies were sufficient for inclusion unless set aside by a competent forum (Paras 9). C) Co-operative Societies - Preparation of Voters List - Nomination by Member Society - Maharashtra Co-operative Societies (Election to Committee) Rules, 2014, Rule 9(1) - Rule 9(1) provides that a provisional list of voters should be prepared by every society in the year in which elections are due; the bank had no authority to delete names of delegates/representatives of member societies on the pretext that they were not members of the parent society. The respondent Election Officer and Authority affirmed that such deletion was not in consonance with the Rules. Held that the provisional voters list must include all nominees duly nominated by member societies unless a competent authority determines their ineligibility (Paras 10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a federal society has authority to decide legality of membership of a member nominated by its member society so as to exclude him from provisional voters list; whether Election Officer has jurisdiction to adjudicate inter-se membership disputes between nominee and primary society; whether bank's deletion of respondent no.5 from provisional voters list was without jurisdiction
Law Points
- Federal society has no authority to decide legality of membership of nominated member at provisional voters list stage
- Election Officer lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate inter-se membership disputes
- valid nomination by member society resolution is sufficient for inclusion
- Rule 9(1) requires society to prepare provisional voters list without power to delete names
- Rule 10 does not empower federal society to exclude nominees
- membership disputes must be resolved before competent forum not election process
