JUDGMENT
1. The material facts for the purpose of this writ petition are narrated as follows :
2. Elections to the Managing Committee of Mandapakala Primary Agricultural Cooperative Society Limited, R.No.H.5622, hereinafter referred to as
‘Society’ were held on 26th July, 1995. 4th Respondent was elected directly as President and 12 others were elected as members of the committee. The petitioners herein were also elected as members of the committee. After the constitution of the committee the 4th respondent issued a notice on 12-2-96 to the petitioners which according to them was received on 19-2-96. In this notice it was alleged that the petitioners have failed to attend four consecutive committee meetings held on 30-9-95,29-11-95,30-11-95 and 20-12-95 and therefore they had acquired disqualification to continue as members of the committee in terms of Section 21B of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964, hereinafter referred as ‘Act’. By this notice, an explanation was called from the petitioners within 7 days. They were asked to explain as to why they should not be removed from the membership of the committee. The 1st petitioner on 20th of February, 1996 replied the notice stating therein that no notice for the meeting of the committee was sent to him as required under Rule 23B of the A.P. Cooperative Societies Rules, hereinafter referred as ‘Rules’. This reply was acknowledged by 4th respondent. Similar reply was sent to the 2nd respondent. who referred the matter on 3rd August 96 to the 3rd respondent for enquiry into the allegations. The 3rd respondent submitted his report to the 2nd respondent stating therein that the notices for the meetings of the committee were sent by Certificate of posting. The 2nd respondent in the meanwhile through his letter dated 17-9-96 requested the 4th respondent to follow the rule position mentioned in the Circular Rc.No. 13404/93-Legal, dated 9th March, 1993 of the 1st respondent herein, but the 4th respondent without following the written instructions of the 1st respondent removed the petitioners from the membership of the committee’ on the ground that they had not attended the four consecutive meetings.
3. On the facts as alleged by the
petitioners and reproduced above, the writ petitioners have challenged the order of 2nd respondent with regard to cessation of membership of the petitioners. The following
grounds have been agitated in the writ petition and also at the time of hearing :
(a) That, the action of the 2nd respondent is in violation of the instructions of the 1st respondent issued on 9-3-1993.
(b) That, the impugned action is illegal in view of Section 21B of the Act read with Rule 24B of the Rules.
The learned Counsel for the petitioner relies on Judgment in K. Venkateswarlu v. Asst. Director Handlooms and Textiles, 1997 (6) ALD 154 wherein similar controversy has been decided.
4. Counter has been filed on behalf of the 4th respondent and in the counter it has been stated that, since the petitioners failed to attend four consecutive meetings they automatically ceased to be members of the Committee and it has also been stated that, during the enquiry it was found that notices of meetings had been given to the petitioners by certificate of posting The 4th respondent further submits that the action taken by him was only after verification of the original records of the society including the Notices book wherein the receipt of meeting notices were clearly acknowledged by the petitioners,
5. The controversy is very narrow and it is limited to the interpretation of Rule 23D and Rule 24B of the Rules. In order to appreciate the import of these rules it is necessary to consider Section 21B of the Act. Section 21B of the Act lays down
“21B. Cessation of membership and reinstatement :–(1) Where a member of the committee absents himself from three consecutive meetings of the committee, he shall cease to be a member of the committee, He may, however, be reinstated by the committee in the manner prescribed, but such reinstatement shall not be made more than once during the term of the committee.
(2) ......" From bare perusal of the section, it becomes clear that whenever a member of the
committee absents himself from three consecutive meetings of the committee he shall cease to be a member of the committee. But there is a provision for reinstatement of membership also, but the section at the same time does not lay down as to who is the authority who shall declare that a member has ceased to be member because of his failure to attend three consecutive meetings. This aspect has been taken into consideration by the Rules and Rule 24B becomes relevant, Rule 24B lays down :
“24-B. Reinstatement of a Committee Member :–(1) If any member of the committee ceases to be a member of committee under Section 21(b) the President, secretary shall inform the same to the Registrar. On receipt of such intimation, the Registrar after satisfying himself that the member had failed to attend the meetings,’ shall inform the member and also the society about the cessation. The member may apply to the Committee under a copy to Registrar for reinstatement within a period of 15 days from the date of intimation. On such application, the Committee in the next meeting shall reinstate him. The, Committee shall not fill up the vacancy by co-option during the above period.”
When one goes through Section 24B, one comes to only one conclusion that it is the Registrar of the Cooperative Societies who has to make a declaration with respect to cessation of membership of a member. When the President finds that a member has remained absent for three consecutive meetings and ceases to be a member under Section 21B of the Act, the President and the Secretary are bound to inform the same to the Registrar, when Registrar receives ‘such intimation he after recording his satisfaction that the member has failed to attend the meetings shall inform the member and also the Society about the cessation. After such an order is passed, the member has a right to apply to the committee with a copy to the Registrar for reinstatement within 15 days from the date of intimation. On such
application the committee is further bound to reinstate the member and the vacancy shall not be filled up during the intervening period.
6. When the facts of the present case are assessed on the touchstone of Rule 24B read with Section 21B of the Act it becomes crystal clear that there has not been any valid order with respect to cessation of membership of the petitioners and the petitioners may be absent for three consecutive meetings, but they will not cease to be members unless an order is passed by the Registrar in terms of Rule’ 24B because Section 21B of the Act only lays down that a member who does not attend three consecutive meetings shall cease to be a member but it does not lay down a method and the procedure by which such declaration has to be made. The method and procedure is given only in Rule 24B and unless Rule 24B is complied with there can be no cessation of membership. This writ petition can be allowed on this ground alone.
7. Therefore, I allow this writ petition and quash the order passed by respondent No.4 declaring that petitioners have ceased to be members of the Society. The petitioners, therefore, shall be treated to be members of the Society as if no orders for their cessation were made. If, in the meantime, any vacancies have been filled up by co-opting other persons as members, that arrangement shall also be ceased. No order as to costs.
