Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana)
Jonnalagadda Pulla Rao vs Government Of Andhra Pradesh And Others on 30 March, 2001
Equivalent citations: 2001(3)ALD661
Author: S.B. Sinha
Bench: S.B. Sinha
ORDER
S.B. Sinha, CJ
1. The question which arises for consideration is as to whether Rule 8 of the Andhra Pradesh Farmers' Management of Irrigation Systems Rules, 1997 (for short, 'the Rules') is ultra vires Section 10 of the Andhra Pradesh Farmers' Management of Irrigation Systems Act, 1997 (for short, 'the Act').
2. The basic feet of the matter is not in dispute. The petitioner herein was elected as President of No. 12 Somavaram Water Users Association, which is an Association envisaged under the said Act. On or about 26-2-2000, the 4th respondent issued notices to 128 members of the said Association asking them to attend the Motion to recall the petitioner whereafter, an order dated 1-7-2000 was issued, which is to the following effect:
"Total members attended to this General Body Meeting... ..126 In the beginning of this meeting, the Authorised Officer, the Sub-Collector, Vijayawada, read the recall notice proposal put upon the President, No. 12 Somavaram Water Users Society on the voting by lifting the hands.
Out of members of 126, 124 members who attended supported the proposal of recall, expressed their support by lifting their hands in voting.
As the votes were caste on the basis of lifting their hands by 51 per cent of members attended, members who supported the proposal by majority votes, as per the Rule 8(4) of Andhra Pradesh Farmers' Management of Irrigation Systems Rules, 1997 the proposal was accepted, was declared by the Authorised Officer, Sub-Collector, Vijayawada.
As the above Resolution was accepted from this day i.e., 1-7-2000 Saturday, it came into force. Hence the President Sri Jonnalagadda Pulla Rao, President of the No. 12 Somavaram Water Users Society ceased to be the President as per Andhra Pradesh Farmers 'Management of Irrigation Systems Rules, 1997 Rule 8(4)."
3. The said order was passed by the 4th respondent herein. Section 10 of the said Act reads thus:
"10. Procedure for recall:--(1) A motion for recall of a Chairman or President or Member of a Managing Committee, as the case may be, of a farmers' organisation may be made by giving a written notice as may be prescribed, signed by not less than one-third of the total number of members of the farmers' organisation, who are entitled to vote:
Provided that no notice of motion under this section shall be made within one year of the date of assumption of office by the person against whom the motion is sought to be moved.
(2) If the motion is carried with the support of majority of the members present and voting at a meeting of the general body specially convened for the purpose, the District Collector or the Government as the case may by shall by order remove him from office and the resulting vacancy shall be filled in the same manner as a casual vacancy."
4. Section 2(1)(g) of the Act defines 'District Collector' to mean the Collector of the district in which the irrigation system is situate and includes any officer specially notified by the Government to perform all or any of the functions of the District Collector under the Act. It stands admitted that no officer has been specially notified by the Government in this behalf. The Government of Andhra Pradesh in exercise of its powers conferred upon it, inter alia, under Section 43 of the said Act, framed Rules known as A.P Farmers' Management of Irrigation Systems Rules, 1997. Rule 8 of the said Rules deals with recall of the Chairman or President. By reason of sub-rule (1) of Rule, 8 the District Collector or an officer nominated by him may receive a recall notice in respect of Chairman or President or Member of the Managing Committee by a farmers' organisation.
5. The proceedings for removal or recall also may be conducted by the officer nominated by the District Collector. Sub-rule (6) of Rule 8, however, states:-
"(6) The officer thereafter shall issue the proceedings of recall to the concerned Chairman, President or the Member of the respective farmers' organisation immediately stating that the recall become effective from the date of passing of the resolution; and accordingly, he shall cease to hold such office."
6. Having considered the matter, we are of the opinion that sub-rule (6) of Rule 8 is ultra vires Section 10(2) of the Act insofar as it relates to the conferring of power upon the officer nominated by the District Collector to issue proceedings of recall to the Chairman or President or the Member of the respective farmers* organisation immediately, stating that the recall can be effective from the date of passing of the resolution whereupon, he shall cease to hold such office. A contention is sought to be raised that whereas sub-
section (2) of Section 10 speaks of removal, sub-rule (6) of Rule (8) speaks of recall of the designated authority.
7. Section 10 provides for procedure for recall in relation whereto Rule (8) aforementioned has been made. It is, therefore, in our opinion, not correct to contend that the power of recall in terms of sub-rule (6) of Rule 8 does not flow from sub-section (2) of Section 10 of the Act inasmuch as the consequence of passing an order of removal or recall is the same, namely, cessation of holding of office of the elected President or Chairman, as the case may be. As admittedly, in the instant case it is the 4th respondent who had issued the proceeding in question, the impugned order cannot be sustained. However, having regard to the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 10 of the Act, the District Collector would be the competent authority to issue such a proceeding. To the aforementioned extent, sub-rule (6) of Rule 8 must be read down.
8. For the reasons aforementioned, the impugned proceedings dated 1-7-2000 cannot be sustained. It is set aside accordingly and the writ petition is allowed. However, having regard to the findings aforementioned, the 3rd respondent (District Collector, Krishna District) shall be entitled to apply its mind on the materials on record and pass an appropriate order. It will also be open to the petitioner herein to file any representation bringing to the notice of the said authority if any illegality or procedural irregularity has been committed in holding of the said meeting. There shall be no order as to costs.