Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3. The crux of the petitioners' challenge to the impugned order is on the grounds that the said order is against the interest of the co-operative housing societies, arbitrary, not in public interest, unwarranted interference in the affairs of the societies, violative of the provisions of the Act and it is illegal and void ab initio. The petitioners mainly rely upon a division bench judgment of this Court in the case of Karvenagar Sahakari Griha Rachana Sanstha Maryadit, Pune and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. , which came to be confirmed by the Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra and Ors. v. Karvenagar Sahakari Griha Rachana Sanstha Maryadit and ors. . In short, it is contended that the order dated 1/8/2001 is against the interest of the members of the society whose views are paramount and secondly there is no legislative policy either under Section 79A of the Act or otherwise enabling the State Government or the Registrar to override the bye-laws of the societies duly approved by the Registrar under the said Act enabling the General Body of the members to fix the non occupancy charges payable by the members who, for some reasons or the other, do not occupy the residential dwellings. It is also alleged that the impugned order is contrary to the norms laid down in respect of subordinate legislation. It is also alleged that the impugned order may enable a member to use the flat as a vehicle for carrying out the object of earning money and thus defeat the spirit of co-operative housing. Lastly, it is contended that though the impugned order is claimed to be in public interest, no material is produced by the respondents to show that public interest has been served by the same. Reliance has been placed on the statement of objects and reasons for incorporating Section 79A in the scheme of the Act and it has been argued that the Government had no power to issue the impugned order as the power is already vested in the Registrar under Section 14 of the Act.

12. Section 79A of the Act clearly states that if the State Government, on receipt of a report from the Registrar or otherwise, is satisfied that in the public interest or for the purpose of securing proper implementation of co-operative production or for preventing the affairs of the society being conducted in a manner detrimental to the interest of the members, it is necessary to issue directions to any class of societies generally, it may issue directions to them from time to time and all societies concerned shall be bound to comply with such directions. As per subsection 2 of Section 79A the State Government may modify or cancel any directions issued as above and in modifying or cancelling such directions may impose such conditions as it may deem fit. Subsection 3 of Section 79A provides for a penal action for failure in complying with any directions or modified directions issued to a society under subsections 1 and 2 and failed without any good reasons or justifications to comply with the directions. Whereas Section empowers the Registrar to call upon the society in the manner prescribed to make the amendments in its bye-laws if the same is found to be desirable in the interest of such society and amendments are required to be made within such time as he may specify. In the case of Karvenagar Sahakari Griha Rachana Sanstha Maryadit (Supra), the Registrar had issued directions on 19/1/1985 to the effect that the tenant ownership type of co-operative housing societies should amend their bye-laws so as (i) to enable the plot holders to construct multi-storied building with more than one residential tenement on their plots and (ii) to form a society of the owners of the flats of the multistoried building which shall be a member of the housing society and be represented by its representative in the housing society. When it was informed by the Registrar that the amendments as directed were not carried out, he issued a Circular on 5/12/1985 threatening to take action under Section 14(2) of the Act. These directions/circulars were challenged by the housing societies, inter alia, on the grounds that they completely destroy the basis of such societies and would encourage commercialisation of housing schemes which is meant for individuals on the basis of the tenant-ownership and that they were without authority of law and violative of Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution. The societies succeeded before this Court and, therefore, the State Government approached the Apex Court. The objects and bye-laws of the society were considered by the Apex Court and it held that though the power is conferred to direct amendment of the bye-laws of the society, yet the paramount consideration, while amending the bye-laws, is the interest of the society. So also the power of the State Government to issue directions in public interest cannot be exercised so as to be prejudicial to the interest of the society. The Apex Court further observed, ....In our view, what is in the interest of the society is primarily for the society alone to decide and it is not for an out-side agency to say. Where, however, the Government or the Registrar exercises statutory power of issuing directions to amend the bye-laws, such directions should satisfy the requirement of the interest of the Society....

The petitioners have relied upon the judgment in the case of Zoroastrian Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. and Anr. v. District Registrar, Cooperative Societies (Urban) and Ors. . In our considered opinion the said judgment is not applicable in the instant case.

In the case of Sahabro Kacharu Patil and Ors. v. Collector, Aurangabad and Ors. 1983 Mh.L.J. 476, a Division Bench of this Court, regarding the scope of Section 79A of the Act, stated thus:

It can then be seen that Section 79A of the said Act deals with the powers of the Government to give directions in public interest. This section only shows that these directions are issued to the Co-operative Societies for the purpose of securing proper implementation of the co-operative production and other development programmes. They are concerned with the business of the affairs of the society being conducted in a manner detrimental to the interests of the members, or of the depositors or the creditors thereof. The Government is also empowered under this section to modify those directions.

16. So far as the second order dated 13/8/2001 is concerned, it is clearly a circular issued by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, "D" Division, Mumbai and it is an appeal to the co-operative housing societies to update their bye-laws in line with the model bye-laws. It further stated that copies of model bye-laws were available for Rs. 30/-each and every co-operative society was required to purchase two copies of these model bye-laws and it is not an order or a directive issued by the Deputy Registrar. Even otherwise, as noted earlier, Section 79A(3) provides for penal action if the directions issued under Section 79A(1) and (2) are not complied with, without furnishing any good reason or justification. At the same time, the directions issued under Section 79A by the State Government are binding on the co-operative housing societies as has been held by this Court in the petitions referred to hereinabove. We do not see any reason to take a different view.