1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR ORDER S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2703/2000 Nehru Sewa Sadan Trust Versus The State of Rajasthan and others DATE OF ORDER --- August 20, 2009 PRESENT HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE PREM SHANKER ASOPA Mr.Suresh Sahni, for the petitioner Mr.Gajanand Mishra Manav, Dy.Govt.Counsel Mr.N.K.Maloo, for the respondent No.4 BY THE COURT (1) By this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 7.3.1996 (Anx.3) whereby Resolution No.7(6) dated 3.1.1988, Resolution No.6 dated 28.8.1988 and Resolution No.4 dated 9.4.1990 have been rescinded by the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Jaipur City, against which one member of the Trust, Abdul Hai Shamim filed an appeal before the Additional Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Rajasthan, Jaipur. That too, was rejected on 19.7.1996 (Anx.4) and subsequently, revision petition was filed by the same person who was Secretary of Nehru Sewa Sadan Trust and the same was also rejected on 28.10.1997 (Anx.5) by the 2 Secretary to Govt. Cooperative Deptt. on the ground that the aforesaid Resolution of transfer of the land to Nehru Sewa Sadan Trust and subsequent fact of having no control over the Trust activities clearly hit interest of the members in terms of not only reduction of assets but also in terms of deprivation of profit accruing from this property. (2) Submission of Mr.Sahni is that by the aforesaid Resolution, the Society has transferred the land and further restrained from interfering with the control of the Trust which is not contrary to the interest of the Society. Therefore, power under section 32 of the Rajasthan Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 (in short `the Act') could not have been exercised by the Deputy Registrar as upheld by the other authorities. Counsel for the petitioner has further placed reliance on Sec.32 of the Act wherein it is provided that if in the opinion of the Registrar, any resolution passed at the meeting of any cooperative society or committee thereof is opposed to the objects of the society or is prejudicial to the interests of the society, or is in excess of the powers of the Society, the Registrar, after giving the cooperative society an opportunity of being heard, may by order in writing rescind the resolution but the authorities concerend have not considered the said aspect of the matter which is sine qua non for exercise of powers under section 32 of the Act. (3) Mr.Maloo, appearing for the respondent No.4 submits that all the authorities have given categorical finding that the 3 transfer of the valuable land and using the same is prejudicial to the interest of members of the Society. He also submitted that the Society consists of its members and it has right to hold property, enter into the contract, institute and defend legal proceedings as per Sec.10 of the Act but the said provisions cannot be construed to deprive the Society of its property prejudicial to the interest of its Members. (4) I have gone through record of the writ petition and further considered rival submissions of counsel for the parties. (5) Before proceeding further, it is relevant to reproduce Resolution No.7(6) dated 3.1.1988, Resolution No.6 dated 28.8.1988 and Resolution No.4 dated 9.4.1990, Sec.10 and 32 of the Act. The same are as under: Resolution No.7(6) dated 3.1.1988 6. नेहǾ सेवा सदन को एक टःट के Ǿप मɅ गठन करने पर ǒवचार 6. इस मामले पर गंभीरता से ǒवचार Ǒकया गया Ǒक यह भवन ÈयɉǑक एक कȧमती जायदाद बन चुकȧ है जो जन Ǒहत मɅ काम आती है और सभी लोग इसकȧ सूर¢ा और बढाने के िलये कामना करते है इस ǒवषय मɅ यह भी गौर Ǒकया गया Ǒक ÈयोǑक सिमितयɉ पर राजकȧय महकमɉ पर दबाब पडता है और कई सिमित पर ूशासक िनयुƠ हो जाते है इसिलये कभी Ǒकसी सूरत मɅ राजकȧय हःत¢ेप होने से इस भवन को बचाने के िलये भी सोचा जाय इस तमाम सोच ǒवचार के बाद सव[ सàमित से यह िनण[य िलया गया Ǒक नेहǾ सेवा सदन को साव[जिनक ूÛयास मɅ बदल Ǒदया जाए ǔजसकȧ Ǿप रेखा पर ǒवचार करने के िलये सिमित के कानूनी सलाहकार कȧ राय लेने हेतु अगली मीǑटंग मɅ कानूनी सलाहकार को बुलाकर राय ले ली जावे ǔजसके िलये कानूनी सलाहकार को सूिचत Ǒकया जाय । 4 Resolution No.6 6. नेहǾ सेवा सदन को टःट के Ǿप मɅ गठन करने के बम मɅ ǒवचार 6.पूव[ मीǑटंग कȧ सूचना के अनुसार सिमित के कानूनी सलाहकार ौी स×यदेव एडवोकेट आज मीǑटंग मɅ उपǔःथत हये और अफसील के साथ ु उƠ टःट का ःवǾप आǑद िनधा[ǐरत करने के काय[ पर चचा[ कȧ गई । सभी आवँयक ǒवचार ǒवम[श के बाद कानूनी सलाहकार को टःट के ूःताǒवत डȣड के लेखन हेतू सव[ सàमित से िनण[य िलया गया । Resolution No.4 “4.मंऽी ने कहा Ǒक नेहǾ सेवा सदन को आयकर ǒवभाग से हमेशा के िलये बचाने के वाःते ूबÛध काǐरणी सिमित के िनण[य ूःताव संÉया 5 Ǒदनांक 27.3.88 के Ʈारा नेहǾ सेवा सदन का रǔजःटड[ टःट बनाया गया है । इस ूःताव कȧ सव[ सàमित से पुǒƴ कȧ गई जो सिमित के उप िनयम संÉया 3 क के तहत है । Sec.10 10. Cooperative societies to be bodies corporate.- The registration of a cooperative society shall render it a body corporate by the name under which it is registered, having perpetual succession and a common seal, and with power to hold property, enter into contracts, institute and defend suits and other legal proceedings and to do all things necessary for the purposes for which it was constituted.” (emphasis supplied) Sec.32 “Power of Registrar to rescind certain resolutions.- (1) If in the opinion of the Registrar, any resolution passed at the meeting of any cooperative society or committee thereof is opposed to the objects of the society or is prejudicial to the interests of the society, or is in excess of the powers of the society, the Registrar, after giving the cooperative society an opportunity of being heard, may by order in writing rescind the resolution in whole or in part specifying the reasons therefor. (emphasis supplied) (2) On receipt of an intimation from the Registrar, of his proposal to rescind the resolution under sub-section (1), the said resolution shall cease to have effect until the Registrar passes final orders in the matter. (6) A perusal of the Resolution would reveal that the 5 Society has virtually transferred land which is prejudicial to the interest of the members of the Society. The Secretary to Govt. Cooperative Department in its order dated 4.11.1997 gave categorical finding that the decision of the Society to transfer an expensive property of the Society to the Trust either wholly or for the management of it more so when the legal nature of the Trust is not clear, clearly hit the interest of the members in terms of not only reduction of assets but also in terms of deprivation of profit accruing from this property. Although the fact of profit is not clear from the record but the other part of the order clearly justify the impugned order passed under section 32 of the Act. (7) There is no dispute between the parties that civil suit challenging the constitution of the Trust is pending in the civil court and therefore, any observations made in this order may not affect the constitution of the Trust. It is made clear that this judgment is restricted to the transfer of the land and control of the same by the Trust. It is expected of the trial court to decide the civil suit expeditiously. (8) In view of the above, no interference is called for and the writ petition is dismissed. (Prem Shanker Asopa)J.