The recent disqualification of seven members of the Goa Dairy Board of Directors (BoD) by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies (RCS) demonstrates a potential of unravelling a Pandora’s Box of procedural irregularities which quasi-judicial authorities are prone to commit while exercising delegated powers.
The most unsettling aspect of the Quasi-Judicial Order of the RCS can be observed in the justification provided by the Registrar in arriving at an abrupt conclusion which states that:
“I am satisfied that immediate action is required to be taken and that it is not reasonably practicable to publish a notice in accordance with the proviso to Section 67A of the Act inviting objections and suggestions.”
Section 67A of the Goa Co-operative Societies Act, 2001 which prescribes conditions for the: “Appointment of Directors, New Board of Directors or Administrator” in its proviso to sub-section (e) specifies:
“Provided that before making such order, the Registrar shall publish a notice on the notice board at the head office of the society, inviting objections and suggestions with respect to the proposed order within a period specified in the notice and consider all objections and suggestions received by him within that period:
Provided further that it shall not be necessary to publish such notice in case where the Registrar is satisfied that immediate action is required to be taken or that it is not reasonably practicable to publish such notice.”
The intention of the legislature must be ascertained from the wording of the proviso which was inserted into the Act, 2001 vide (Amendment) Act, 2009 which was published in the Official Gazette (extraordinary) on March 16, 2009.
Here, the intention of the legislature does appear to empower the Registrar with discretionary powers that deem it reasonable to bypass the need to issue a Notice inviting objections and suggestions.
However, this discretionary powers would in all propensity be fettered by the famous Latin maxim: “Audi Alteram Partem” which translates as “hear the other side” and this principle of jurisprudence would be central to the concept of inviting objections and suggestions to the proposed Order.
A humble opinion in interpreting the rationale behind the ‘intention of the legislature’ for having drafted such a proviso in the newly inserted section would be to retain a degree of transparency and demonstrate a penultimate sense of reasoned decision-making by the RCS.
These fetters upon the discretionary powers of the Registrar cannot be displaced lightly as doing so would have the effect of belittling the faith that the citizenry placates into the integrity of the public offices executing quasi-judicial powers.
The recent quasi-judicial order of the RCS does mention that it may lead to serious adverse effects on the functioning of the Dairy and the cattle feed plants.
This reasoning by the RCS may be based on prospective apprehensions that may not entirely be substantiated by definitive findings which could justify an extrapolation of the circumstances which may have led to the irregularities in the restricted time frame during which the previous irregularities were brought to the notice of the Registrar.
Nevertheless, sub-Section (2) of 67A does envisage: “(2) The Board of Directors or administrator so appointed shall be subject to the control of the Registrar and obey such instructions as the Registrar may, from time to time give, and shall have power to discharge all or any of the functions of the Board of Directors or of a director, as the case may be, and take all such actions as may be required to be taken in the interest of the society.”
At the cost of prospective estimation, the seven members who have been disqualified by the Order of the RCS dated: April 21, 2023, could be expected to petition the High Court of Bombay at Goa praying for a Writ of Certiorari or a direction for quashing and setting aside the impugned order, passed by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Goa against all the Petitioners thereby appointing a Committee of Administrators (CoA) to manage the affairs of the Goa State Cooperative Milk Producers Ltd, Ponda.
However, this Ferris wheel appears to be all too familiar and is reflected in the Order of the High Court of Bombay at Goa dated: April 11, 2019 wherein a bunch of writ petitions were heard together and were disposed of by a common order.
It was observed by Justices: Prithviraj K Chavan, J and R D Dhanuka, J: “2. …The learned Advocate General does not dispute that the said order was passed without hearing any of the Petitioners and is passed in violation of the principles of natural justice.
3. In view of this position, the impugned order dated August 31, 2018, which is in gross violation of the principles of natural justice deserves to be quashed and set aside. Consequently, all orders passed and actions taken pursuant to the said order also deserve to be quashed and set aside.”
The Registrar of Co-operative Societies would be optimally empowered to issue directions under Section 69 of the Act, 2001: “69. Directions by the Registrar for the successful conduct of business.-
The Registrar may, from time to time, issue such directions or directives to a co-operative society or a class of co-operative societies as he considers necessary for the successful conduct of business and on all matters incidental thereto and such directions or directives shall be binding on them.”
