P. Anja Reddy and Others vs Government of A.P. and Others

B. Subhashan Reddy, J.—In this writ petition, the provision contained under Rule 23-AAA of A.P. Cooperative Societies Rules introduced by amendment by way of subordinate legislation is questioned as being ultra vires to the fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 16 of Constitution of India and consequently to declare the impugned order dated 14-9-1992 passed by the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Vikarabad Division, Rangareddy District, the third respondent herein, accepting the resignations of six members of the Managing Committee of Angadi Chittampally Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society Limited, Pudur as illegal.

At the out-set the attack on the touch stone of Article 16 of Constitution of India fits rejection as the same is quoted absolutely out of context. The contention on the basis of Article 16 of Constitution of India is totally unfounded and not relating to the lis even remotely.

Coming to the conclusion on the touch stone of Article 14 of Constitution of India, it is submitted by Mr. P. Srinivas, the learned counsel for the petitioners, that Rule 23-AAA of A.P. Co-operative Societies Rules (in brief ''the rules'') inserted by an amendment investing the Registrar with the power of acceptance of resignation is arbitrary infracting the clauses of equality before law and equal protection of law guaranteed under Article 14 of Constitution of India.

Tine contentions raised are as infra:

(a) that the power is unguided;

(b) that the power is unbridled;

(c) that the Registrar should not be the authority to consider the resignations of the Members of the Managing Committee inasmuch as tine Managing Committee is elected by the general body and that the said general body alone is competent to entertain and decide the issue relating to resignations of Member/s of Managing Committee of the Society.

(d) even assuming that tine Registrar can decide upon the resignation of a Member of Managing Committee, the same should be preceded by consultation with the society meaning, to say, the general body.

The learned counsel for the petitioners has cited the decisions reported in Board of Directors of Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Central Land Mortgage Bank Ltd. and Others Vs. Chittor Primary Co-operative Land Mortgage Bank Ltd. and Others, ; General Officer Commanding-in-Chief and Another Vs. Dr. Subhash Chandra Yadav and Another, and D. Srinivasa Rao v. Govt. of A.P., 1990 (2) ALT 464

Board of Directors of Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Central Land Mortgage Bank Ltd. and Others Vs. Chittor Primary Co-operative Land Mortgage Bank Ltd. and Others, is a case in which the point involved was whether a rule can be made when the said power is not conferred under any of the statutory provisions. The said Judgment as such is inapplicable to the case on hand.

General Officer Commanding-in-Chief and Another Vs. Dr. Subhash Chandra Yadav and Another, is a case in which the Cantonments Act, 1983 did not confer on the Central Government power to frame rules regarding conditions of service and as such the rule was held to be ultra vires. Such is not the case here and as such the above Judgment also does not help the petitioners in the instant case.

In D. Srinivasa Rao v. Govt of A.P. (3 supra) the proposition laid down was that a rule is framed to carry-out the object of the Act and when an Act did not make a provision for a particular aspect, the rule could not be framed in advance touching upon a non-existent statutory provision. The said proposition is also not applicable to the facts of the instant case.

It is needless to mention that act of resignation is a voluntary act, while expulsion or removal is an involuntary act. In a democratic polity dissensions are bound to be there. Further, the previous mode of indirect election has been done away with and now there is a direct election provided. The background of events leading to serious disputes when the Managing Committee exercise the power of accepting the resignation, presumably, prompted the Government to incorporate a subordinate legislation by framing a rule. This rule is salutary, as the Registrar cannot be said to be a partisan either interested in one faction or the other. Further, the proceedings before the Registrar will be authentic as in the normal functioning of an executive office a particular procedure is followed. The action of the Registrar is neither unguided nor unbridled as the said Registrar is also a Registrar delegated with the main powers u/s 3(2) of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 and there are hierarchy of authorities over him to control and check him. In fact the ultimate authority so far as the Statute is concerned, is the Government, which is invested with sweeping powers of supervision as also power to issue directions apart from the revisional powers u/s 77 of the Act. When the resignation is voluntary, it is unuhderstandable as to how I can countenance an argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners that either it should be placed before the general body for consideration or the Registrar should consult the general body before accepting the resignation. Every committee member has got an inherent right to tender resignation. Nobody can stop him. He cannot be commanded to function perforce, eventhough he does not want to continue in the office. There is no restriction placed either under the statute or the rules framed thereunder preventing Member /s of the Managing Committee from tendering resignation to the post to which he/they are elected or nominated. In fact, such an embargo cannot be placed. If such is the situation, absolutely there is no purpose or object in either placing the matter before the general body or requiring the Registrar to have prior consultation with general body as this is not a matter which can be put to vote. What cannot be put to vote, cannot be a matter for any discussion and if there cannot be any discussion, it is absolutely unnecessary to convene a general body for the purpose of considering resignation.

In the co-operative movement, the members elect their Managing Committee to manage the affairs of the society and the said elected representatives are entitled to resign from the office and this is one implied under the provisions of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act and as such providing the authority to consider the said resignation as also the procedure prescribed thereof requiring the Member/s of the Managing Committee to submit the resignation in person to the Registrar by incorporating Rule 23-AAA into A.P. Co-operative Societies Rules, 1964, is perfectly within the rule making power and conferred u/s 130 of A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964. Viewed from any angle, the challenge made to the rule in question is unsustainable and this writ petition is devoid of any merits.

The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. No order as to costs.