PUNDLIK versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

PUNDLIK versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

Under Rule 5(2), a co-operative society may change its nominated representative for election within the specified period and the Collector must effect the change if action is taken strictly in accordance with the Rules. In this case, the Sangh's resolution nominating the appellant was valid, majority means most votes (not absolute majority), and the Collector's refusal was contrary to law.

Parties
Appellant: Pundlik; Respondent: State of Maharashtra; Respondent: Respondent No. 7 (Shivajirao Pathrikar); Respondent: Aurangabad Zilla Sahakari Doodh Utpadak Sangh Ltd.; Respondent: Maharashtra Rajya Sahakari Doodh Maha Sangh Marvadit, Mumbai; Respondent: Collector, Aurangabad
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
25 August 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Election of Committee Representatives, Nomination Procedures, Writ Jurisdiction
Election Law Co Operative Societies Election of Committee Representatives Nomination Procedures Writ Jurisdiction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pundlik

Appellant

State of Maharashtra

Respondent

Respondent No. 7 (Shivajirao Pathrikar)

Respondent

Aurangabad Zilla Sahakari Doodh Utpadak Sangh Ltd.

Respondent

Maharashtra Rajya Sahakari Doodh Maha Sangh Marvadit, Mumbai

Respondent

Collector, Aurangabad

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a co-operative society can change its representative for election within the stipulated period under Rule 5(2) of Maharashtra Specified Co-operative Societies Election to Committee Rules, 1971
  2. 2 Whether the Collector was obliged to effect such change
  3. 3 Whether majority for nomination means simply most votes or an absolute majority

Ratio Decidendi

Under Rule 5(2), a co-operative society may change its nominated representative for election within the specified period and the Collector must effect the change if action is taken strictly in accordance with the Rules. In this case, the Sangh's resolution nominating the appellant was valid, majority means most votes (not absolute majority), and the Collector's refusal was contrary to law.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Collector's order dated June 28, 2005 quashed and set aside.
  • Collector directed to effect change as per Resolution No. 7 dated June 9, 2005.