THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION Nos. 19708 & 19826 OF 2008 COMMON ORDER: These two writ petitions arise, in the context of holding elections to ﬁll the resultant vacancy of the President of Ramabhadrapuram Primary Agriculture Cooperative Society Ltd., (for short “the Society”). The elections to the Managing Committee of the Society were held in October 2005. The majority of the members of the Managing Committee moved a motion of No-conﬁdence, against the President. In a meeting held on 24.7.2008, No-conﬁdence motion was carried out. To ﬁll the resultant vacancy of the President of the Society, the District Collector, the Election Authority, issued a notiﬁcation, dated 21.8.2008. An Election Oﬃcer was appointed, and 5.9.2008 was ﬁxed, as the date of election. A notice in this regard was issued on 28.8.2008. However, vide communication dated 4.9.2008, the Election Authority stayed the election. One of the members of the Managing Committee, ﬁled W.P.No.19708 of 2008, challenging the communication dated 4.9.2008. A member of the Society ﬁled W.P.No.19826 of 2008, challenging the action of the authorities under the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act (for short “the Act”), in not taking steps under Section 32 (7) of the Act, against the members of the Managing Committee, who are said to have committed default and incurred disqualiﬁcation under Section 21-A of the Act. He pleads that 7 members of the Society have incurred disqualiﬁcation and they are not eligible to participate in the ensuing election. Heard the learned counsel for the respective petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Cooperation. The programme for electing the President of the Society has already been notiﬁed by the Election Authority on 21.8.2008. However, through proceedings dated 4.9.2008, he stayed the election. The said proceedings do not contain any reasons. The stay appears to have been granted, obviously on a representation submitted by the petitioner in W.P.No.19826 of 2008. The only basis for staying the election appears to be that some of the members of the Managing Committee have incurred qualiﬁcation, on account of their failure to repay the amount borrowed by them. The Act and the Rules made thereunder no doubt stipulate the circumstances, under which the members of the Society would incur disqualiﬁcation, either to be elected or to continue in the elected oﬃce. Section 21-A of the Act is one such, which brings about disqualiﬁcation in case a member commits default. Default, in turn, is deﬁned under Rule 24(1)(b) of the Rules. There are several categories of disqualiﬁcations, that are attached to members of the Society, or members of the Managing Committee, be it in the context of election or continuance in the oﬃce, thereafter. However, unless an order of disqualiﬁcation as such, is passed by a competent authority, no individual can be debarred from holding an oﬃce. Rule 24(3), in a way, prescribes the procedure that has to be followed before any disqualiﬁcation is attached to a member. It reads as under: “24(3) Chief Executive Oﬃcer or President where there is no Chief Executive Oﬃcer shall be responsible to keep a watch on disqualiﬁcation of member(s) or Managing Committees as detailed below; (a) Automatic disqualiﬁcation of a member under Section 21(g) or the Managing Committee under Section 21AA(5) and 21AA(6); (b) If orders are issued by Registrar under Section 21(e); (c) Chief Executive Oﬃcer shall report the status to Managing Committee under Section 21(f) and if the Managing Committee passes an order of disqualification. (d) For an other reason as speciﬁed in the bye-laws; and (e) Chief Executive Oﬃcer/President shall promptly inform the Registrar and place a report on all such disqualiﬁcation in the General Body meeting for information and when convened. (4) Before passing a resolution under sub- rule 3(c) or 3(d) above the committee of a society shall give such person an opportunity to state the objections if any, to the proposed action and if the person wishes to be heard, he shall be given an opportunity to be heard. The General Body of such society shall through a resolution declare that a person shall cease to be a member of the committee of the society concerned from the date of the disqualification.” From a perusal of this, it becomes clear that automatic disqualiﬁcation would emerge against a member, only when he fails to attend two consecutive meetings. Automatic disqualiﬁcation, under Section 21-AA (5) & (6), are against the Managing Committee as such, and not against individual members. For any other category of disqualiﬁcations, the proceedings have to be initiated by the Chief Executive Oﬃcer, or the President. It is only when a resolution, as contemplated under the relevant rules, is passed, that the disqualiﬁcation would get attached. Sub-rule (4) of Rule 24 clearly mandates that before passing any resolution, disqualifying a member, the committee should issue a show-cause notice and give an opportunity of being heard. None of these steps have taken place, in the instant case. Unless and until a member is disqualiﬁed, in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the Act and the Rules, his right to be continued in the elected oﬃce, cannot be scuttled in any manner. The mere existence of a possibility of a member to become disqualiﬁed, cannot be a factor to stall the election process, or to disable the members to elect the President. Viewed from any angle, the impugned proceedings dated 4.9.2008, cannot be sustained. For the foregoing reasons, W.P.No.19708 of 2008 is allowed and the order impugned therein, is set aside. W.P.No.19826 of 2008 is dismissed. Consequently, the Election Authority and the Election Oﬃcer are directed to conduct election to the oﬃce of the President of the Society, within a period of 15 days, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ 16th September 2008 Note: Issue C.C. in two days. L.R. copies to be marked. (B/o) PAN