Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

R Saravanan vs Ministry Of Cooperation on 16 January, 2026

                           के ीय सूचना आयोग
                     Central Information Commission
                        बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
                      Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                      नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067


File No: CIC/MOCOP/A/2024/131587



R Saravanan                                     .....अपीलकता/Appellant


                                   VERSUS
                                    बनाम


The CPIO                                          .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Ministry of Cooperation, Atal Akshay Urja Bhawan,
CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi - 110003

Date of Hearing                :   06.01.2026
Date of Decision               :   16.01.2026


INFORMATION COMMISSIONER :          SANJEEV KUMAR JINDAL

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on       :   23.05.2024
CPIO replied on                :   04.06.2024
First appeal filed on          :   09.07.2024
First Appellate Authority's    :   NA
order
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated     :   24.09.2024




                                                                  Page 1 of 8
 Information sought

:

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 23.05.2024 seeking the following information:
"(1) My letter dt.04.12.2023 addressed to the Central Registrar of Co-operative Societies, New Delhi-

110003 for taking appropriate action on the matter referred thereon under copies to several important dignitaries.

(2) My application under section 6(3) of the RTI Act 2005 dated 23.02.2024.

(3) Your reply dated 11.03.2024 vide File No: I-

11012/2/2021-L&M. I had requested several information's vide Section 6(3) of the RTI Act 2005 on 23.02.2024 about of my letter dated 04.12.2023. Your goodselves have been sent reply on 11.03.2024. I am not at all satisfied with that of the reply dated 11.03.2024 sent by your goodselves. Since the stipulated time to make 1st Appeal was elapsed, I hereby submit this letter requesting the following information's as per section 6(3) of the RTI Act 2005 for which necessary postal order for Rs. 10/- is enclosed towards fee.

(1) Kindly furnish the information of the action taken by the Central Registrar of Co-operative Societies, New Delhi for the reference numbers from 1 to 10 of my letter dt.04.12.2023.

(2) Kindly furnish the information, the appropriate action taken against the Central Registrar of Co-operative Societies, New Delhi for not having taken any step to take appropriate action for the references numbers 1 to 10 in my letter dt.04.12.2023.

(3) Kindly furnish the information about of the action taken on my letter dt.04.12.2023 by the Central Registrar of Co-operative Societies, New Delhi.

Page 2 of 8

(4) Kindly furnish the information for which reason the action has not been taken by the Central Registrar of Co-operative Societies, New Delhi on my letter dt.04.12.2023 even after the expiry of 145 days.

(5) As there are no opposition directors against the present management, the dismissing authority and the appealing authority is the same management. Kindly furnish the information to whom I have to apply in the above circumstances revision petition for reinstatement into services of the said Society.

(6) I have alleged in my letter dt.04.12.2023 and its references from 1 to 10 that the Chairman & Board of Directors of the said Society are illegally occupying their posts violating MSCS Acts, Indian Railways Establishment Manual Volume II Chapter XXIII & Section 15(1) (c) & 15(2) (e) of the Railway Services (Conduct) Rules 1966. Kindly furnish the information whether my allegation is correct or false. If correct, kindly furnish the action taken therefor. If false, kindly furnish the reasons therefor.

(7) I have alleged in my letter dt.04.12.2023 and its references from 1 to 10 that the Chief Executive/Managing Director Sri. S. Ramalingam of the said Society is illegally occupying his post till date violating MSCS Acts, Bye-laws & Special Bye-laws relating to service conditions of the Society's Staff of the said Society even after the completion of 73 years of age as per his voter ID No. HTC1173327. Kindly furnish the information whether my allegation is correct or false. If correct, kindly furnish the action taken therefor. If false, kindly furnish the reasons therefor.

(8) Several important sections of MSCS Acts against Co-operative Principles have been violated by the then Central Registrar of Co- operative Societies, New Delhi duly registering the very important Bye-law Nos. 50 & 58(5) Page 3 of 8 related to the 'Budget' of the said Society vide Certificate No. L-11016/29/86 Dated 19.04.1996 as recommended by the illegal Chief Executive and the illegal Board of Directors of the said Society and approved by the Representative General Body thus the said Society is functioning without 'Budget' for the past 27 years in which huge expenditures have been incurred in several important heads particularly in the "Appointment of employees". Kindly furnish the information whether the above is true or false if it is true the action against the concerned Central Registrar, the illegal Chief Executive Sri. S. Ramalingam & the illegal Board of Directors of the said Society is required. If it is false the reasons therefor.

(9) As stated in the above information No. 8 that the said Society is functioning without 'Budget' for the past 27 years. The notice for the Annual Representative General Body Meeting would have been sent to the office of the Central Registrar of Co-operative Societies, New Delhi every year in which there was no mention about of the 'Budget'. Kindly furnish the information whether the Central Registrar has taken appropriate action against the illegal Chief Executive and the illegal Board of Directors of the said Society for having not furnished 'Budget' before the Representative General Body as recommended by them for their approval as per the MSCS Act. If yes, kindly furnish the information of the action taken therefor and if not, kindly furnish the reasons therefor.

(10) The Central Registrar of Co-operative Societies, New Delhi would have seen the above meeting notice in which he would have found out that the 'Budget' for the ensuing year has not been furnished. It is known that he has not properly peruse the above notice. If yes, kindly furnish the information regarding the action taken against the concern Central Registrar and if not, kindly furnish the reasons therefor.

Page 4 of 8

(11)As stated as above, no 'Budget' has been placed before the Representative General Body by the illegal Chief Executive and the illegal Board of Directors for their approval for the past 27 years as against the Co-operative Principles, MSCS Acts & Bye-laws of the said Society. Kindly furnish the information whether the above procedure is correct. Whether this procedure may be allowed by the concerned Central Registrar of Co-operative Societies, New Delhi years together. If he had done so kindly furnish the information regarding the appropriate action taken against him, the illegal Chief Executive and the illegal Board of Directors of the said Society.

(12)The Central Registrar (Sri. J.N.L. Srivastava) in his Order No. L-11016/29/86-L&M Dated 06.01.1989 has registered & approved several amendments to Bye-laws, Special Bye-laws and Appendix to Special Bye-laws of said Society as per section 9 of the MSCS Act 1984. At that time the sections 42(2)(e) & 103 were in existence. But one Sri. K.S. Venkateswaran Dy. Director (Co-operation), New Delhi in his letter No. L. 11016/29/86-L&M Dated 27.09.1989 has advised the said Society not to send appendix to special Bye-laws citing the section 42(2) (e) of the MSCS Act 1984.

It is submitted that the Central Registrar alone is the competent authority to register & approve all the Bye-laws as per section 9 of the MSCS Act 1984 while section 42(2)(e) was in existence. His subordinate Sri. K.S. Venkateswaran, Dy Director (Co-operation) New Delhi after not only breathing the above Central Registrar's Order but also Parliament's decision with his overriding power has advised as above.

(a) Kindly furnish the information whether the Central Registrar has acted in accordance to the MSCS Act and Parliament decision. If yes, kindly furnish the information and if not, kindly furnish the reasons therefor.

Page 5 of 8

(b) Kindly furnish the information whether the Dy. Director (K.S.Venkateswaran) has acted in accordance to the MSCS Act and Parliament decision. If yes, kindly furnish the information about of the appropriate action taken against him and if not, kindly furnish the reasons therefor."

2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 04.06.2024 stating as under:

"I am to refer to your Request for Information under RTI Act 2005, received vide letter dated 23/05/2024 and to say that w.r.t point Nos. 1 to 7, it is informed that as per the provisions of Section 52(f) of Multi-State Cooperative Societies (MSCS) Act, 2002 (available on cres.gov.in portal), the Chief Executive under the general superintendence, direction and control of the board is empowered for making appointments to the posts in the multi-State co-operative society in accordance with the bye-laws and further to make provisions for appointment, their service conditions and disciplinary action against them is under the powers and functions of the board of a multi-State cooperative society u/s 49 of the said Act. w.r.t point No. 8 to 11, it is informed that as per the provisions of Section 52 of the MSCS Act, 2002, the day to day management of the business of the society is under the powers and functions of the Chief Executive of the society. w.r.t point No. 12, it is requested to refer to the provisions of MSCS Act, 2002."

3. Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 09.07.2024. The FAA order not on record.

4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:

The following were present:-
Appellant: Not present Respondent: Arun Kumar Singh, Under Secretary.
Page 6 of 8

5. Proof of having served a copy of Second Appeal on Respondent while filing the same in CIC is not available on record.

6. The Appellant was not present despite the notice for hearing having been served.

7. The respondent while defending their case reiterated the position taken by the CPIO in his reply and stated that the reply contains the procedure of appointment and election as per the Multi-State Cooperative Societies (MSCS) Act, 2002.

8. Written submission dated 29.12.2025 filed by the respondent is taken on record. The same states as under:

"2. In this regard it is informed that the cooperative societies registered under the provisions of the Multi-State Cooperative Societies (MSCS) Act, 2002 function as autonomous cooperative organizations and accountable to their members. The Multi-State Cooperative societies are required to function as per the provisions of Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002 and rules made there under read with approved bye-laws of the society which includes the roles and powers of the members, Board, General Body of the Society and Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies (CRCS). If any complaints are received against the society in the office of Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies, the same is forwarded to society concerned with the directions to repay the amount of deposits to the depositors/members as per norms. As per the provisions of Section 49 of the MSCS Act, 2002, the business matters such as to admit members, to accept the deposits and investing & lending the same, falls under the powers and functions of Board of Society and the day-to-day management of the society staff matters including payment of salary to them, etc. fall under the powers and functions of the Chief Executive of the society as per the provisions of Section 52 of the MSCS Act, 2002."

Decision:

9. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the parties present and perusal of the records, notes that the information given by the CPIO is not satisfactory and is generic in nature. The Commission, on basis of documents placed before it on record, directs the CPIO to provide parawise available information on the RTI Application Page 7 of 8 to the appellant, as per the provisions of the RTI Act, within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

SD/-

SANJEEV KUMAR JINDAL(संजीव कुमार िजंदल) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) date: 16.01.2026 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) (Col Prabhat Kumar) Dy Registrar 011- 26107051 Addresses of the Parties:

(1) The CPIO Ministry of Cooperation, Atal Akshay Urja Bhawan, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi - 110003 (2) Shri. Saravanan Page 8 of 8 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)