Case Note & Summary
Background: The writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was filed by thirteen petitioners who claimed to be elected members of the managing committee of Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit, Talegaon (Bho), taluka Devni, District Latur, a co-operative society registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (respondent no. 4). They challenged the order dated 19 June 2006 passed by the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Udgir (respondent no. 3) appointing a committee of three persons (respondent nos. 5-7) to manage the affairs of the society under Section 78(1)(a)(ii) of the Act. The petitioners alleged that the appointment was illegal, politically motivated, and without jurisdiction. Facts: The term of the elected managing committee was to end on 14 February 2006. In a meeting on 27 October 2005, the managing body decided to start the election process and nominated Trimbak Kishanrao Sali as Election Officer. A proposal for approval of the nomination was submitted to the Assistant Registrar on 28 December 2005. Before approval, a request letter was sent to the Election Officer on 30 December 2005 to immediately declare the election programme. The petitioners claimed that the election programme was published and they were elected unopposed on 20 February 2006 as members of the managing committee. However, by order dated 10 January 2006, the Assistant Registrar appointed an administrator to take over the administration by removing the existing managing committee. After declaring the election results, the petitioners held a meeting on 16 April 2006 and passed a resolution authorizing the Chairman, Vice Chairman, and four other members to operate the bank account. Meanwhile, one Bhagwanrao Gaikwad, Vice President of the Maharashtra State Congress Committee, forwarded a letter dated 7 February 2006 to the Minister of Co-operation urging the appointment of an administrative committee. The Minister sent the letter to the Additional Secretary, who called for a report about the eligibility of five members named in the letter. After receiving the Assistant Registrar’s report, directions were given by the District Joint Registrar, and on 19 June 2006, the impugned order was passed appointing respondent nos. 5-7 as a committee to manage the society. Legal Issues: The sole legal issue was whether the appointment of the committee under Section 78(1)(a)(ii) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 was legal, proper, and sustainable. Arguments: The petitioners argued that the impugned order contained no reasons, was passed due to political interference, and was without the grounds required under Section 78(1)(a)(ii). The respondents contended that the petitioners had no locus standi, that the writ petition was not maintainable because an alternative remedy of appeal/revision was available and disputed questions of fact arose, and that the petitioners had suppressed material facts. The respondents further argued that the petitioners had conducted a farce election while an administrator was in charge. Court's Analysis: The judgment text provided is truncated and does not contain the court’s analysis or final reasoning. The text ends with the reproduction of Section 78(1)(a)(ii) of the Act. No judicial reasoning or conclusion is available in the excerpt. Decision: Not mentioned in the provided text.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appointment of the committee comprising of respondents no.5 to 7 by virtue of the impugned order dated 19th June, 2006 is legal, proper and sustainable?
