Prithviraj K. Chavan JUDGMENT
N.M. Jamdar, J.
1. The Goa Urban Co-operative Bank is one of the largest co-operative banks in Goa. The term of the Board of Directors of the Bank had come to an end in December 2016. The existing Board continued. The elections were held on 9 May 2017. Nine directors were elected. Out of nine directors, six were from the general category, one each from the category of Chartered Accountant and the category of person with banking experience, and one from the women category. Two posts remained vacant i.e. one from women category and one reserved, as no nominations were filed.
2. On 29 May 2017, the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Goa, exercising power under Section 67A of the Goa Cooperative Societies Act, 2001 appointed two directors to the Board for the two vacancies. Those were, Ms. Sonia Sidharth Kunkolienkar, the Respondent No. 4 from women category. The second was Mr. Prabha Dulo Gawde, the Respondent No. 5 from SC/ST category. Registrar noted in the order that two members are required to be appointed to fill in the vacancies as it is necessary to have a full-fledged board. He noted that no application was received from the officer of the Bank for the appointment to any of these vacancies, which showed a lack of interest. He noted that a writ petition was filed by one of the members to hold the first meeting of the Bank, which was due on 5 June 2017. He decided to exercise the power to appoint a member suo motu and decided that the notice of the proposed order is not necessary, dispensed with it and proceeded to pass an order on 29 May 2017 appointing the Respondents No. 4 and 5 on the Board of Directors.
3. The Petitioner, one of the elected directors, has challenged the order passed on 29 May 2017 by way of this Petition.
4. The Petitioner, by amending the Petition, has also challenged the constitutional validity of Section 67A of the Act on the ground that it is inconsistent with the principles of autonomous functioning and democratic member control of the co-operatives, and it is inconsistent with Article 243ZI of the Constitution of India.
5. The Goa Urban Co-operative Bank is a scheduled Bank. It is governed by the provisions of the Goa Co-operative Societies Act, 2001. The Bank was established in the year 1964. The financial position of the Bank is sound. The deposits as on 31 March 2017 are ` 92230.44 lacs. The advances are ` 52711.13 lacs, and net profit is ` 101.46 lacs. The Bank has sixteen branches in Goa. The State Government has no shareholding or any funding in the Bank. The total number of members as of 31 March 2018 is 107652. There are 22715 women members.
6. Admittedly, there are two groups amongst the nine elected Directors. Five Directors, the Petitioner and the Respondents No. 10 to 13 belong to the one group. The Respondents No. 6 to 9 belong to the second group. The second group supports the appointment of Respondents No. 4 and 5. It is thus quite evident that the appointment of respondents No. 4 and 5, as directors will substantially alter the control dynamics in the Bank.
7. The assertions of the Petitioner about the political background of the appointed directors, Respondents no. 4 and 5 have not been controverted. These are that the Respondent No. 4 is the wife of the sitting Member of Legislative Assembly for Panaji and that the Respondent No. 5 is affiliated to the ruling party in the State.
8. Further, it is also an admitted pos........