GAJANAN NARAYAN PATIL AND ORS. versus DATTATRAYA WAMAN PATIL AND ORS.

Citation: [1990] 1 S.C.R. 491 · Decided: 20-02-1990 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B.C. RAY · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

.. 
GAJANAN NARAYAN PATIL AND ORS. 
v. 
A 
DATTATRAYA WAMAN PATIL AND ORS. 
FEBRUARY 20, 1990 
[B.C. RAY, KULDIP SING!j AND R.M. SAHA!, JJ.] 
B 
Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act 1960-Section 27 and 
73JD read with Rule 57A and Bye Law of Society-Whether nominees 
of financial institutions and co-opted Technical Directors are entitled to 
vote and participate in special meeting. 
The appellants, elected Directors of the Sanjay Sahakari Sakhar 
Karkhana Ltd., signed a requisition and sent the same to the Respon-
dent 3, Joint Director of Sugar and Joint Registrar Cooperative 
Societies, Maharashtra State, requesting him to summon a special 
meeting of the Committee of the karkhana to consider the proposed 
motion of no-confidence against the Chairman of the Committee, 
Respondent No. 1. The requisition was signed by more than I/3rd of the 
total members in accordance with the provisions of Clause (2) of Sec. 
73 ID of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act J960. On receipt of the 
said requisition, Respondent No. 3 issued a notice dated I3.9.I989 con-
vening -a special meeting of the Committee of karkhana i.e. Board of 
Directors on 25.9.1989. The said notice was issued to the elected mem-
bers only. No notice was sent to nominated members of the fmancial 
bodies or co-opted members. Respondent No. I filed a writ petition 
before the High Court and challenged the action of the Respondent No. 
3 in not issuing the notice to the co-opted members and the member-
nominees of the Financial Institutions, as according to him, those mem-
bers are entitled to sit and vote at the special meeting when the commit-
tee considers the vote of no-confidence under Section 73 ID of the Act. 
The High Court on consideration of the provisions of Section 73 ID read 
with Rule 57 A and bye-law No. 29 of the Bye Laws of .the Society, 
allowed the writ petition holding that jhc three members of the second 
category who have gut a limited right to vote at a meeting except at a 
meeting to elect Chairman or Vice-Chairman are entitled to be served 
with notices of the special meeting and to participate in the said meeting 
and as the two nominees of the Financial Institutions and the expert 
co-opted members had not been served with the notice of requisition 
meeting, the requisition meeting could ·not be held. The High Court 
thus directed the Registrar, respo11dent No. 3, to issue fresh notices lo 
the elected members as well as to the three Directors of the second 
491 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
A 
B 
c 
D 
492 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1990] 1 S.C.R. 
category before holding the meeting and accordingly disposed of the 
writ petition. The appellants thereupon moved the High Court and 
obtained a certificate of fitness under Article 134(1) of the Constitution 
and have filed this appeal. 
The main contention of the appellants is that the nominees of the 
Financial Institutions and the co-opted members are not entitled to 
notice. 
Dismissing the appeal (by majority B.C. Ray and Kuldip Singh, 
JJ.) this Court, 
HELD: (Per B.C. Ray, J,) 
The right to participate in the special meeting as well as to vote for 
such meeting is a statutory right and it flows from the provision of the 
Act, Rules and Bye-laws of the Society. It has nothing to do with the 
democracy. [501E] 
The words 'entitled to sit and vote in any meeting of the society', 
refer to member to sit and vote not in every meeting but in any meeting 
of the society. The only express bar as provided in Sectiion 27 is that the 
members, that is, the Directors representatives of the Financial Institu-
tions as well as the expert Director (co-opted) are not competent to 
E 
participate only in the election of members of the society. [501E-F] 
The Directors have been conferred the right to participate in any 
meeting including the special meeting of the Board of Directors or of the 
Managing Committee of the society. [501 G l 
F 
The requisition meeting that has been convened cannot be held as 
the representatives of the Financial Institutions in the Board of 
Y 
Directors as well as the Expert Director (co-opted) under the relevant 
provisions of Bye-law No. 29 have not been served with I.he requisition 
notices of special meeting convened by the respondent No. 3 pursuant to 
the said requisition notice. [502B-C] 
G 
(Per R.M. Sahai, ].-dissenting) 
Sub-section (i) of Section 73-D provides the manner in which 
Chairman or Vice-Chairman who holds such Office by virtue of his 
election may ceas
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.