LexZILEY SINGH, ETC. versus REGISTRAR, CANE COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, LUCKNOW AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c D E F G H ZILEY SINGH, ETC • . v. REGISTRAR, CANE COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, LUCKNOW AND ORS. January 20, 1972 [K. S. HEGDE, A. N. GROVER AND A. N. RAY, JJ.] 149 U.P. Cooperati've Socleties Act, 1.965 and Cooperc. 1ti've Societies Rules>- 1961-Election of Committee of management of a society-S. 20 confer• one \'Ot.e on. one 1nenzber-lnterpretation of Rule 40_9 by. Registrar by which each n1en1ber would cast more than one vote was againse statute-- Regi'itrar has no power under RuJe 409 to issue such circular. Under s. 32 of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 the business to be conducted at the annual general meeting of a society includes inter alia election of the committee of management of the sochty. Under Rule 409 of the Act namely the Cooperative Societies Rules, 1967 a cooperative society may, for the purpose of the election of the Committee of manage- ment, with the· previous sanction of the Registrar of Cooperative Societies (a) divide its membership into different groups on territorial or any other rational basis, and (b) also specify the number or proportion of the members of the committee of management in such a manner that different areas or interests, as the case may be, in the society may, as far as may be, get suitable representation on the committee of management. On S 1'Jovem- ber 1969' the Registrar issued a circular interpreting Rule 409 and laid clown the principle that "all lhe members of the general body" of the coo~tive society would "exercise their right of vote in filling all the seats of Clected Directors". Tho eledtions in the cooperative societies .concerned in tbe present appeals were held according. to the aforesaid· directions . given by the Registrar. The elections were challenged and ,.t asid.e iti proceedings. under the Act. On the question whether the cirCular lntetj>ieting · · Rule 409 issued by the Registrar was valid, this Court, · HELD : Under role 409 the principal matters to be kept in the foietront are these. First, the society will divide the coilstituencies w territorial basis or any ·other rational . basis. By territorial basis is. meant territory where the member will residi<. 'Residence is. tbOrefore 'the relative re- quirement of territorial basis. lf any other rational basis like occupation or vncatinn is determined to be the ballis of a cilmtituen.oy the persoos falling within the constituency will satisfy that test. Secondly, the society will specify the proportion of members of the committee in such a manner that different areas or interests may get suitable representation. The. inhe- rent idea is that such areas or interest will obtain representation. If mem· bership is on territorial basis the different areas will get representatiOn according to the interest of such territories. Again, if '!C'fupltional « professional tests are . created for dividing groups such interests willlhhave· to be given suitable represeritation. Representation is therefore wi re- ference to areas or intere~ts. Judged by lite,. principles the impeached circular of the Registrar suffered from the vice of giving the' members the right of casting vote in constituencies to which they did not belong. This strikes at tire ba!ic rOot of the fight of representation. This., also reads as under the principle of one member one vote which is ,made a role elf law in the Act. [155 E-0) I 150 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1972] 3 S.C.R. The words 'affairs of the society' in s. ·20 cannot be equated with tho A constituencies to give each member a right to vote for each constituency. That would defeat the purpose of s. 20 and rule 409. The basic idea of representation for each constituency depends on the mandate of the respec- tive constituency and not ofother constituencies. That is why s. 20 of tho Act speaks of one member having one vote irrespective of shareholding. It means equality of votes of members. [155 HJ The impeached circular of the Registrar was illegal and unwarranted. B The Registrar has no power to interpret rule 409. The Registrar has equally no power to express view with regard to the conduct of the election and regulate the voting rights by giving members more than one vote. The society is to frame rules for elections. The rules and the bye-laws cannot be in derogation of the statute and statutory rules. At an election of members of the committee of managemeni one member will have only one vote for the constit
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.