Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Heard the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the Learned Counsel for the Respondents.

2. The Petitioner herein is a member in the Railway Employees Co-operative Credit Society Limited, which is a registered Society under the Multi State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002. His grievance is that, the 2nd respondent is holding the post of Chairman of http://www.judis.nic.in the said Society since 1998, though Section 44(2) of the Multi State Co- operative Societies Act prohibits persons holding the post of the Chairmanship for more than two terms consecutively.

3. According to the petitioner, in the year 2011, the Indian Constitution was amended by inserting Article 43 B in Part IV and new Part IX B in the Constitution of India emphasising the importance of Co- operative movement and democratic function of the Co-operative Societies. The Multi State Co-operative Societies Act, governs the functioning of all Co-operative Societies that functioning in more than one state. Under section 44(2) of this Act prohibits member of the board to be eligible to be elected as the Chairperson or President of the Multi State Co-operative Society after he has held the Office as such, during two consecutive terms, whether full or part. Whereas, the 2nd respondent prior to the Multi State Co-operative Society Act came into force was the Chairman of the 1st respondent Society and holding the post till 2003. Again, in the year 2003, he was elected as Chairman of the society for a term of 5 years, which was his II-term consecutively. In the year 2008, he was elected as Vice-Chairman. The post of Chairman was left unfilled. By virtue of the amendment to the byelaw of the Society, the 2nd respondent exercised the power of the Chairman and in all http://www.judis.nic.in correspondence and Court proceedings, he claimed himself as the Chairman of the Society. Again, he was elected as Chairman in the year 2013 and 2018. The spirit of the Section 44(2) is to give fair amd equal opportunity to all in the democratic process. To avoid consolidating power in one hand the prohibition of holding the top post for more than two consecutive terms has been prescribed. Further, the cooling period of one full term also emphasised in the proviso to the sub-section (2) of Section 44. Whereas, the 2nd respondent has subvert the said provision of the Act by occupying the post of Vice Chairman after his two terms as Chairman. During that period, the post of the Chairman was kept vacant deliberately so that, the 2nd respondent can exercise the power of the Chairman by default. Again, after the cooling period, he was elected for the post of Chairman. As a result, the 2nd respondent is continuously holding the post of the Chairman of the 1st respondent Society for more than 20 years in a blatant violation of section 44(2) of the Act both by letter and spirit.

7. Further, a Writ Petition similar to the prayer in the present Writ Petition was filed by the Union Colleague of the writ petitioner, by name Dhanapal in W.P.No.16161 of 2013 and that Writ Petition was dismissed by the High Court of Madras on 16.09.2019. On the same point for the subsequent period, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition.

8. Regarding the allegation that the 2nd respondent continuously holding the post of Chairman for more than 20 years, the respondent state that, the said allegation is false, baseless and denied. The Act under section 44(2) prohibits holding the post of Chairman/President for more than two consecutive terms. It is an admitted fact, even by the petitioner that the 2nd respondent is not holding the post of Chairman for more than two consecutive terms. His http://www.judis.nic.in prayer itself discloses that the 2nd respondent is alternatively holding the post of Chairman and Vice-Chairman. The Act does not prohibit such action. While so, the prayer in the Writ Petition is even on merits not maintainable.

9. In the additional counter affidavit, the respondents have extracted the Section 37 in the repealed Multi State Co- operative Society Act, 1984, which restricts members from holding the post of Chairman/President or Vice Chairman/Vice President post for more than two consecutive terms and the present Section 44 in the new Multi State Co-operative Society Act, 2002 and pointing the difference in the two sections submit that, the legislature in their wisdom have modified the restriction, imposed in the Multi State Co-operative Society, 1984 Act, in the subsequent Act of the year 2002. As such, the prayer of the petitioner that, the restriction of holding of office for two consecutive terms should include the period of Vice Chairman/Vice President is absolutely baseless, untenable and unsustainable.