MADHYA PRADESH RAJYA SAHAKARL BANK MARYADIT versus STATE OF M.P. AND ORS.

Citation: [2007] 2 S.C.R. 1049 · Decided: 22-02-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.K. MATHUR · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

MADHYA PRADESH RAJYA SAHAKARl BANK MARYADIT 
A 
~ 
~ 
v. 
STATE OF M.P. AND ORS. 
FEBRUARY 22, 2007 
[A.K. MATHUR AND H.S. BEDI, JJ.] 
B 
Co-operative Societies: 
Madhya Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 - s.55-Power 
under-Scope, in light of the Act of 1994-Held: Registrar of Co-operative c 
Societies under s.55 has power to frame rules but at the same time he cannot 
ignore the impact of the Act of 1994-The Registrar can lay down reservation 
in favour of SCs, STs and OBC as general condition of service only in Co-
operative societies in which the State has more than 51% paid up share 
capital and not for any other co-operative societies-Madhya Pradesh Lok D 
Seva (Anusuchit Jatiyon, Anusuchit Jan Jatiyon Aur Anya Pichhade Vargon 
Ke Liye Arakshan) Adhiniyam, 1994 - s.2(b)-Constitution of India, 1950-
Article 16(4A). 
Jn exercise of its power under s.55 of the Madhya Pradesh Co-operative 
Societies Act, 1960, Registrar, Co-operative Societies issued an order dated E 
6.3.1997 whereby under Chapter 4 Conditions of Recruitment, Rule 5 of the 
Madhya Pradesh Rajya Sahakari Bank Employees (Terms ofEmployment and 
Working Conditions) Rules, 1976 was amended whereby conditions of 
recruitment were relaxed. High Court declared the order as ultra vires and 
...._ 
allowed the writ petition. 
F 
The question which arose for consideration in the present appeal is 
whether the power exercised by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Madhya 
Pradesh under s.55 of the Act of 1960 can be sustained in the iight of the 
Madhya Pradesh Lok Seva (Anusuchit Jatiyon, Anusuchit Jan Jatiyon Aur 
Anya Pichhade Vargon Ke Liye Arakshan) Adhiniyam, 1994 (Act of 1994). G 
It was contended by the Appellant that the power of the Registrar under 
-< 
s.55 of the Act of 1960 is not regulated by the Act of 1994 and that under 
s.55(1) of the Act of 1960, the Registrar has full power to give direction for 
reservation in order to implement the Constitutional provision under Article 
•· 
1049 
H 
'( 
1050 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2007] 2 S. C.R. 
A 16(4-A) of the Constitution. The Respondents however contended that the Act 
of 1994 clearly lays down that reservation will only be applicable in 
1 
-r 
establishments where the State Government has more than 51 per cent share-
holding and not in other establishments. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
B 
HELD: 1. The Act of 1994 was promulgated by the State Government 
for the benefit of providing reservation in the vacancies in public services 
and posts in favour of persons belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled 
Tribes and other Backward Classes. Therefore, this Act only contemplates 
reservation in public services. (Para 8) (1055-B) 
,r 
c 
1.2. In 'order to claim reservation in public offices, the definition of 
establishment as mentioned in Section 2(b) of the Act of 1994 will have to 
fulfilled. Section 2(b) clearly says that the establishment would include any 
office of the State Government or local authority or statutory authority 
D 
constituted under the Act of the State or a University, or a company, 
Corporation or a Co-operative Society in which not less than 51 percent paid 
up share capital is held by the State Government and including work charge 
and contingency paid establishments shall be 'establishment' and in that case 
reservation can be made for the members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled 
Tribes and .other Backward classes. The very object of the Act is to provide 
E reservation in public service and posts. Therefore, it confined only for 
reservation in public services and not any other private institutions. Reading 
the object and reason along with the definition of establishment it clearly 
transpires in the context of the Co-operative Society in which the State 
Government has paid up share capital of 51 percent or more, then the 
reservation can be made in such Co-operative Society. [Para 8) 
F 
(1055-C-E-G) 
Indra Sawhney& Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. (19921 Supp.3 SCC 217 
and M.Nagaraj & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., [2006] 8 SCC 212, referred 
to. 
G 
2.L Reading of the objective of the Act of 1994 along with the definition 
~c-, 
of establishment it transpires that the Registrar under Section 55 of the Act 
.-.: .. 
of 1960 can lay down service condition for Co-operative Society in which the 
/ 
State has 51 percent of share capital. In case any Co-operative Society in 
>-· 
which the State does not have 51 percent of share capital, then that Co-
·' 
H 
o

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.