Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitions by Labour Cooperative Societies Challenging Cancellation of Registration Under Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 — Societies Failed to Carry on Business for Over Two Years, Justifying Cancellation Under Section 22.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Prosecution
  • 107
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, five labour cooperative societies registered under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960, filed writ petitions challenging the cancellation of their registration by the Divisional Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Nagpur. The Registrar had cancelled the registration under Section 22 of the Act on the ground that the societies had not carried on business for a continuous period of two years. The petitioners argued that the cancellation was illegal and that they should have been given an opportunity to be heard. However, the court noted that the petitioners did not dispute the factual finding that they had not carried on business for over two years. The court held that the Registrar has the power to cancel registration under Section 22 if a society fails to carry on business for two years, and the cancellation was justified. The court dismissed all the writ petitions, upholding the cancellation of registration.

Headnote

A) Cooperative Law - Cancellation of Registration - Section 22 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 - Failure to carry on business for two years - The petitioners, labour cooperative societies, challenged the cancellation of their registration by the Divisional Joint Registrar on the ground that they had not carried on business for a continuous period of two years. The court held that the Registrar has the power to cancel registration under Section 22 if a society fails to carry on business for two years, and the petitioners did not dispute the factual finding that they had not carried on business for over two years. The petitions were dismissed. (Paras 1-5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the cancellation of registration of the petitioner societies under Section 22 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 on the ground that they had not carried on business for a continuous period of two years was valid.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court dismissed all the writ petitions, upholding the cancellation of registration of the petitioner societies under Section 22 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960.

Law Points

  • Cancellation of registration under Section 22 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act
  • 1960 is justified if a society fails to carry on business for a continuous period of two years
  • even if the society has not been dissolved or liquidated.
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2016 LawText (BOM) (01) 133

Writ Petition No.5249 of 2014, Writ Petition No.5250 of 2014, Writ Petition No.5251 of 2014, Writ Petition No.5252 of 2014, Writ Petition No.5253 of 2014, Writ Petition No.5254 of 2014, Writ Petition No.5255 of 2014

0000-00-00

Bajarang Labour Cooperative Society, Renuka Labour Cooperative Society, Bahubali Labour Cooperative Society, Bumiputra Labour Cooperative Society, Chitamani Labour Cooperative Society Ltd., Seeta Labour Cooperative Society, Govinda Labour Cooperative Society

Divisional Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Nagpur; District Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Nagpur; Nagpur District Labour Cooperative Societies Federation Ltd.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petitions challenging cancellation of registration of labour cooperative societies under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960.

Remedy Sought

The petitioners sought to quash the orders cancelling their registration and to restore their registration.

Filing Reason

The petitioners' registration was cancelled by the Divisional Joint Registrar on the ground that they had not carried on business for a continuous period of two years.

Previous Decisions

The Divisional Joint Registrar cancelled the registration of the petitioner societies under Section 22 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960.

Issues

Whether the cancellation of registration under Section 22 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 on the ground of failure to carry on business for two years is valid.

Submissions/Arguments

The petitioners argued that the cancellation was illegal and that they should have been given an opportunity to be heard. The respondents supported the cancellation, stating that the societies had not carried on business for over two years.

Ratio Decidendi

Under Section 22 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960, the Registrar has the power to cancel the registration of a cooperative society if it fails to carry on business for a continuous period of two years. The factual finding that the societies had not carried on business for over two years was not disputed, and therefore the cancellation was justified.

Judgment Excerpts

The petitioners do not dispute the factual finding that they have not carried on business for a continuous period of two years. In that view of the matter, the cancellation of registration under Section 22 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 is justified.

Procedural History

The Divisional Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Nagpur cancelled the registration of the petitioner societies under Section 22 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. The petitioners filed writ petitions before the Bombay High Court challenging the cancellation.

Acts & Sections

  • Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960: 22
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitions by Labour Cooperative Societies Challenging Cancellation of Registration Under Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 — Societies Failed to Carry on Business for Over Two Years, Justifying Cancellation Und...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Grants Bail to Accused in NDPS Case Due to Non-Compliance with Section 50 — Search Conducted Without Informing Right to be Searched Before a Magistrate or Gazetted Officer. Non-compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act renders the se...