High Court of Karnataka Upholds Term Limits for President of Multi-State Co-operative Society under Section 44(2) of the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002 — Restriction on Re-election Held Constitutionally Valid. The court distinguished between term limits and term lengths, holding that the restriction is a reasonable measure to prevent concentration of power and promote democratic functioning, and that Parliament had legislative competence under Entry 43 List I.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU In Favour of Prosecution
  • 4
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Sri Konkadi Padmanabha, President of M/s Campco Ltd., a multi-state co-operative society, challenged the constitutional validity of Section 44(2) of the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002, which imposes term limits on the President of a multi-state co-operative society, restricting re-election after two consecutive terms. The petitioner argued that the provision was harsh, arbitrary, unscientific, irrational, and violative of fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(c), and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, and that Parliament lacked legislative competence to enact such a provision. The Union of India defended the provision as a reasonable restriction aimed at preventing concentration of power and ensuring democratic functioning. The High Court of Karnataka, after hearing arguments, held that Parliament had legislative competence under Entry 43 of List I to enact the provision, as multi-state co-operative societies are trading corporations operating in more than one state. The court distinguished between term limits and term lengths, noting that term limits are permissible restrictions on statutory rights. The court found that the restriction was reasonable and in public interest, aimed at promoting good governance and preventing monopolization of power. The classification between multi-state and state co-operative societies was held to be reasonable and not violative of Article 14. The court also noted that the petitioner failed to rebut the presumption of constitutionality. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, and Section 44(2) was upheld as constitutionally valid.

Headnote

A) Constitutional Law - Legislative Competence - Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002 - Section 44(2) - Parliament has legislative competence to enact Section 44(2) under Entry 43 of List I of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution, which covers incorporation, regulation, and winding up of trading corporations, including co-operative societies operating in more than one state. The Act is a complete code for multi-state co-operative societies. (Paras 1-10)

B) Constitutional Law - Right to Contest Election - Right to Hold Office - Article 19(1)(c) and Article 19(1)(g) - Section 44(2) of the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002 - The right to contest an election or hold office in a co-operative society is not a fundamental right but a statutory right. Restrictions on such rights, including term limits, are permissible if they are reasonable and in public interest. The term limit of two consecutive terms for the President is a reasonable restriction aimed at preventing concentration of power and promoting democratic functioning. (Paras 11-20)

C) Constitutional Law - Reasonable Classification - Article 14 - Section 44(2) of the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002 - The classification between multi-state co-operative societies and state co-operative societies is based on an intelligible differentia, i.e., the multi-state character, and has a rational nexus with the object of ensuring uniform regulation of societies operating across state boundaries. Hence, Section 44(2) does not violate Article 14. (Paras 21-25)

D) Constitutional Law - Presumption of Constitutionality - Burden of Proof - The petitioner failed to rebut the presumption of constitutionality attached to Section 44(2). The court held that the provision is not arbitrary, harsh, or irrational, and is a valid piece of social legislation aimed at promoting good governance in multi-state co-operative societies. (Paras 26-30)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the restriction of term limits imposed by Parliament under Section 44(2) of the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002 for seeking re-election to the post of President of a multi-state co-operative society is constitutionally valid?

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The writ petition is dismissed. Section 44(2) of the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002 is held to be constitutionally valid.

Law Points

  • Constitutional validity of term limits
  • Section 44(2) Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act 2002
  • distinction between term limits and term lengths
  • reasonable classification
  • Article 14
  • Article 19(1)(c)
  • Article 19(1)(g)
  • Article 246
  • Entry 43 List I
  • Entry 32 List II
  • co-operative societies
  • right to contest election
  • right to hold office
  • legislative competence
  • presumption of constitutionality
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2015 LawText (KAR) (09) 67

Writ Petition No.1393/2015 (CS-RES)

2015-09-11

H.G.Ramesh

K.G.Raghavan (Senior Counsel for petitioner), Aruna Shyam.M (Advocate for petitioner), Prabhuling K Navadgi (Additional Solicitor General for respondent)

Sri Konkadi Padmanabha

The Union of India

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

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the constitutional validity of Section 44(2) of the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002.

Remedy Sought

Quashing of Section 44(2) of the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002, declaring it as harsh, arbitrary, unscientific, irrational, unconstitutional, violative of fundamental rights, and ultra-vires the Constitution.

Filing Reason

The petitioner, President of a multi-state co-operative society, was aggrieved by the term limit restriction under Section 44(2) which prevented him from seeking re-election after two consecutive terms.

Issues

Whether Parliament had legislative competence to enact Section 44(2) of the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002? Whether Section 44(2) violates Article 14 of the Constitution? Whether Section 44(2) violates Article 19(1)(c) and Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution? Whether the term limit imposed by Section 44(2) is a reasonable restriction?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that Section 44(2) is harsh, arbitrary, unscientific, irrational, and violative of fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(c), and 19(1)(g). Parliament lacked legislative competence as co-operative societies fall under Entry 32 List II (State List). Respondent argued that Parliament has legislative competence under Entry 43 List I (Corporations) as multi-state co-operative societies are trading corporations. The term limit is a reasonable restriction to prevent concentration of power and ensure democratic functioning.

Ratio Decidendi

The restriction of term limits under Section 44(2) of the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002 is constitutionally valid. Parliament has legislative competence under Entry 43 List I. The provision does not violate Articles 14, 19(1)(c), or 19(1)(g) as it is a reasonable restriction in public interest, aimed at preventing concentration of power and promoting democratic functioning in multi-state co-operative societies.

Judgment Excerpts

Whether restriction of term limits imposed by the Parliament under Section 44(2) of the multi-state co-operative societies Act, 2002 for seeking re-election to the post of President of a multi-state co-operative society is constitutionally valid? The question is answered in the affirmative. For clarity, it is necessary to state that there is difference between term limits and term lengths.

Procedural History

The writ petition was filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru. It was heard and reserved for orders on 24.07.2015 at the Principal Bench, Bengaluru, and later pronounced on 11.09.2015 at the Kalaburagi Bench.

Acts & Sections

  • Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002: 44(2)
  • Constitution of India: 14, 19(1)(c), 19(1)(g), 226, 227, 246, Entry 43 List I, Entry 32 List II
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Trap Witness and Lack of Corroboration. Conviction under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 set aside as demand and acceptance of bribe not pr...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds High Court's Rejection of Application Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC in Suit for Damages. Court fees are not payable on a tentative claim at the initial stage when the exact valuation is to be adjudicated later, as per Section 7(i)...