Holding

The Superintendent of Excise, as Registrar, possesses the authority to disqualify members under Section 21 because the disqualification power is derived from the admission criteria in Section 19 and is exercisable under Rule 20.

Summary

The petitioners, who were members of the Srikalahasthi Toddy Tappers Co-operative Society, were challenged on the ground that they were not genuine toddy tappers and were consequently removed from membership by the Superintendent of Excise, who also acted as Registrar under the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964. The High Court had confirmed their removal, holding that the Superintendent had the authority to disqualify members. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the power to disqualify an existing member under Section 21 of the Act was lawfully delegated to the Superintendent, given that admission powers under Section 19 were delegated. The Court observed that Section 21 incorporates the disqualification criteria derived from Section 19, and Rule 20 of the Rules empowers the Superintendent to act on ineligibility, thereby obviating the need for a separate delegation. Consequently, the Court upheld the High Court’s view that the Superintendent possessed the requisite authority. The special leave petition filed against the High Court’s order was dismissed, leaving the petitioners’ removal from the society affirmed.

Issues considered

Whether the Superintendent of Excise, acting as Registrar under the Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964, has the power to disqualify an existing member of a co-operative society under Section 21 of the Act.

Legislation cited

Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964s. 19, s. 21

Subjects

Co-operative societiesMembership disqualificationDelegation of statutory powersExcise SuperintendentSpecial leave petitionStatutory interpretation

Judgment

l
A A. NADAMUNI AND ORS. ~-

v.
THE PROHIBITION AND EXCISE COMMiSSIONER,
NAMPALLY, HYDERABAD AND ORS.

JANUARY 13, 1997
B
[K. RAMASWAMY AND G.T. NANAVATI, JJ.]
-7--

Andhra Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 : Sections 19 and
21-Toddy tappers Co-operative Society-Superintendent to Excise-Also
c Registrar of Cooperative Societies-Power to disqualify members-Rules re-
quiring that the toddy tappers Co-operative Society should consist of members-
who are really and actually i11 the avocation of tappers Writ challenging mem-
bership ofpetitioners-111te1im dissection by High Court-Competent authority
concluding that petitioners were not tapers-consequentional removal from
D membership-Decision confinned by Hif!ft Court-Rejection of contention
that the R gistrar (Superintendent of Excise) has no power to remove them
0
'f-
from membership of Society-Held, power under Section 19 in the matter of
admission of the members of the Society, was delegated to the Superintendent
of Excise-As a consequence, it is not necessary that there should be an express
separate confe1111ent of power of the Registrar under Srction 21 on the Super-
E intendent of Excise to disqualify membe,._T71e view taken by the High Coult
is not vitiated by any e1ror of law WQITanting inteiference.

--
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition (C)
No. 25281 of 1996.

F From the Judgment and Order dated 13.12.96 of the Andhra Pradesh
High Court in W.A. No. 1437 of 1996.

L.N. Rao, S.U.K. Sagar and V.S. Reddy for the Petitioners.

The following Order of the Court was delivered :
G
This special leave petition has been filed against the Order of the
Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court Made on December ~
13, 1996 in Writ Appeal No. 1437/96 confirming the judgment of the
learned single Judge, dated December 4, 1996 in Writ Petition No. -
H 11385/96.
226
A. NADAMUNI v. PROHIBITION & EXCISE COMMR. 227
---1-. The only question for our consideration is : whether the Superinten- A
dent of Excise who is also Registrar for certain purposes of Andhra
Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 (for short, the 'Act') has the
power to· di~ql!alify an existing member of the Srikalahasthi Toddy Tappers
Co-operative Society? The object of the Society is to ameliorate the
economic conditions of tappers by providing them means of livelihood by
tapping the Toddy trees allotted by the Excise authorities. The provisions
B
of the Act, the rules made thereunder and the by-laws of the Society
;,<
regulate the admission of the members. The toddy tappers Co-operative
Society should consist of members who are really and actually in avocation
of tappers and are allotted palm era trees for tapping toddy as their sources
of livelihood. On a Complaint that non-tappers were admitted and are c
members of the Society at the behest of a member, a writ petition came to
be filed in the High Court. Pursuant to an interim direction given by the
High Court to conduct tapping te~t, the competent officers conducted the
same in that behalf. The authorities came to conclude that the petitioners
were not the tappers as, they did not fulfil the condition of the tapping
...}
D
experience etl:. and accordingly were removed from the membership which
decision was confirmed by the High Court in the writ petition as also in
appeal.

It was contended that the Registrar (Superintendent of Excise) has
no power to remove them from membership- of Society. The primary E
contention raised in the High Court as reiterated by Shri L.N. Rao, learned
counsel for the petitioners, is that while power under Section 19, in the
matter of admission of the members of the Society, was delegated to the
~,
Superintendent of Excise, power under Section 21, namely, disqualification
~ ' for being a member of the Society etc. was not delegated to him. Therefore, F
the Superintendent of Exicse was without jurisdiction to remove the
petitioners from the membership of the Society. We find no force in the
contention. It is seen that admission of the members is governed by the
provisions of Section 19 of the Act. Section 21 prescribes disqualification
for being a member of the Society. Sub-section (1) postulates that a person
shall be disqualified for being admitted as, and for being, a member, in the G

__.
... circumstances enumerated in clauses (a) to (e). Clause (aa) was also
introduced in 1988 and thereby another ground for disqualification came
to be added to the existing grounds. Under the said clause (aa), a person
.. who is not eligible for membership of the Society under Section 19 is
disqualified for being admitted as, and for being, a member of the Society. H
228 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] 1 S.C.R.

A Under these circumstances, once the power of non-admission of a member
of the Society under Section 19 has ·been engrafted in Section 21 and
delegated for removal from membership as envisaged in Rule 20 of the
Rules, Superintendent of Excise has power under Rule 20 which empowers
.hiin to consider the ineligibility of beihg removed from membership under
· Section -19. Section 19 power was delegated ,to the Superintendent of
B Excise. 'rhe~in~scapable consequence is that the subsequent disqualifica-
tion for being a member of the Society·also becomes available under Rule
20 as a disqualification if the member ceases to be a tapper. It would be
one of the factors to be considered under Rule 20. As a consequence, it is
not necessary that there should be an express separate conferment of
C power of the Registrar under Section 21 on the Superintendent of Excise.
We, therefore, hold that the view taken by the High Court is not vitiated
by any error of law warranting interference.

The special leave petition is dismissed.

T.N.A. Petition dismissed.