Election to managing committee on casual vacancy

The query suggests no legal elements.

Hi Adv. P. Venu, 

I could not understand your reply. Can you please elaborate.

No election authority.  In the General Body meeting, the Executive/Governing/Managing Body members will elect with majority of members attended the meeting and the majority is 2/3rds or 3/5th general members present.

Dear kavisatyanarayan, thanks for your reply. Our society membership is total 278 and hence the election should not be within the purview if Generalbody. Therefore my query, that as per law a regular general election procedure has to be followed. Please correct me if I am wrong.

v. Vaidyanathan 

If there are more nominations than the number of casual vacancies, election will be held. It will not be a general election, but a byelection. The Managing Committee can call an Extraordinary  General Meeting for the purpose of the election. The tenure of members so elected shall be co-terminus with that of the Managine Committee.

Hi Dr. Mrs. Ramani, 

though holding election in EGM is not specified anywhere in the Mah. State Coop. Act by logic I can agree. In the case that I have put forward the Election Authority has intimated to the Managing Committee that he will attend the Managing Committee meeting and hold the election in the MCM. Is this a fair election?

If so the election has to be held by the representative of the election authority. In recent years the Government has created a lot of confusion giving conflicting and impracticable orders.

Generally less volunteers are coming forward to work for society (majority of persons are there for irresponsible comments.  In this case you are volunteering and are expected to be welcome by the GB.

If no other candidate is coming then it is perfectly legal for the GB to elect you upooosed.  If howver anyone objects to the same then there is nothing illegal for the GB to appoint a Rrturning Officer who will start poll procedure.

However, the type of query indicates that you are more interested in firghting a dispute and for the purpose you must have a dispute.

Dear Adv Sudhir Kumar,

I don't have any dispute. My intention is  to  have a fair election. The election officer wants to conduct the election in managing committee. In the committee there is a group who have put up a  candidate (not applied voluntarily) to whom the group supports who are in majority. In such case the election will not take fair. Therefore my view is that the election shoul  d be held in a special general meeting of members. its a large dociety with 278 membets. 

in 

The election officer conducting election with the MC members only present is illegal. You can protest. If he still conducts the election in the same manner, you can complain to the Registrar to declare the election null and void. If he does not act, you can go to co-operative court.

1. Actually some persons have a problem.
2. Some persons just imagine a problem
3. Still some do not stop at mere imagination they do creat a problem to solve

Fats given by you suggest :-

1. some persons have resigned.
2. you want to volunteer
3. you do not want to be paeacefully elected.  You want someone must contest your unanimous nomination and then the election be conducted in such a manner and despite winning you can challenge legality of the same.

You do not want to reaslise that polling will be done only if anyone else than you is interested to contest or otherwise GB cal induct you elgally by raising of hands.  In such meeting if someone is intrested in fielding a candidate he canobject and have the Rerturning Offficer appointed.

Once a rreturning officr is appointed then you can invent so many allegations of irregularity on his part.

So better you buy (or freely motivate ) someone who may be willing to oppose your unanimous election so that a dispute can be created for as desired by you.

The Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961 gives in detail the election procedure. It is to ensure a free and fair election. Earlier issues of Model Byelaws, copies of which were/are sold by the Federation of Co-operative Housing Societies, also were giving the election procedures in detail.

In large societies, where members did not know each other and there was vested interest to become members of the Managing Committee and share the spoils, elections were hotly contested. There were also malpractices. In smaller societies the opposite was the case. Very few or no one wanted to assume the botheration of becoming MC members and work for the Society. It was a head ache for them. The result was no names or fewer than required number of names came forward. Hence at the ensuing AGM, those, if any, who had given nomination were declared elected and for the unfilled vacancies, members were cajoled to becme MC members. Because of the malpractices in the large societies, Maharashtra Government decided to control the elections. They appointed an election authority and ordered that all societies should take orders from him/her. The smaller societies, where elections were so far held peacefully, had also to contact the election authority and hold election under the supervision of the election officer appointed by him. Things go like this thereafter. The election officer comes to the Society. The Managing Committee calls a formal or informal meeting of the members of the society. I would not call it a General Meeting. Very few attend the meeting. The new Managing Committee is elected from members attending the meeting. The election rules under the law have no relevance in this case. Let us look at Mr. Venkateswaran's case under such a scenario.

I have to presume that 2 vacancies were announced on the notice board and there was no formal call for nomination with a proposer and a seconder. Mr. Venateswaran intimated the Secretary/Chairman that he wanted to contest or become member of MC, if there was no contest. It is not clear whether he had given a written formal nomination, a written letter or merely oral nomination. If the MC had not formally called for nomination the question does not arise. He says that there were 2 candidates. It is not clear whether 2 candidates are including him or excluding him. I presume that there are 3 candidates including Venkiteswaran. Hence there should be election. The fear of Venkiteswaran is that the election officer will come sit with the MC only and declare the other 2 as elected. The fear of Venkiteswaran is just. From my own experiece I know that such a thing can happen.

If it happens Venkiteswaran is justified in complainining to the authorities. I do not know why Adv. Sudhir Kumar is sarcastic. For one thing Mr. Venkiteswaran has not presented his case here properly.

Originally posted by : Dr. MPS RAMANI Ph.D.[Tech.]

The Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961 gives in detail the election procedure. It is to ensure a free and fair election. Earlier issues of Model Byelaws, copies of which were/are sold by the Federation of Co-operative Housing Societies, also were giving the election procedures in detail.In large societies, where members did not know each other and there was vested interest to become members of the Managing Committee and share the spoils, elections were hotly contested. There were also malpractices. In smaller societies the opposite was the case. Very few or no one wanted to assume the botheration of becoming MC members and work for the Society. It was a head ache for them. The result was no names or fewer than required number of names came forward. Hence at the ensuing AGM, those, if any, who had given nomination were declared elected and for the unfilled vacancies, members were cajoled to becme MC members. Because of the malpractices in the large societies, Maharashtra Government decided to control the elections. They appointed an election authority and ordered that all societies should take orders from him/her. The smaller societies, where elections were so far held peacefully, had also to contact the election authority and hold election under the supervision of the election officer appointed by him. Things go like this thereafter. The election officer comes to the Society. The Managing Committee calls a formal or informal meeting of the members of the society. I would not call it a General Meeting. Very few attend the meeting. The new Managing Committee is elected from members attending the meeting. The election rules under the law have no relevance in this case. Let us look at Mr. Venkateswaran's case under such a scenario.I have to presume that 2 vacancies were announced on the notice board and there was no formal call for nomination with a proposer and a seconder. Mr. Venateswaran intimated the Secretary/Chairman that he wanted to contest or become member of MC, if there was no contest. It is not clear whether he had given a written formal nomination, a written letter or merely oral nomination. If the MC had not formally called for nomination the question does not arise. He says that there were 2 candidates. It is not clear whether 2 candidates are including him or excluding him. I presume that there are 3 candidates including Venkiteswaran. Hence there should be election. The fear of Venkiteswaran is that the election officer will come sit with the MC only and declare the other 2 as elected. The fear of Venkiteswaran is just. From my own experiece I know that such a thing can happen.If it happens Venkiteswaran is justified in complainining to the authorities. I do not know why Adv. Sudhir Kumar is sarcastic. For one thing Mr. Venkiteswaran has not presented his case here properly. 

Please read agains his firs boog.  He said tha tthere are two vacancies and there are two candidates.

he imagines that :-

1. There will be election.
2. there will be a returning officer.
3. the returning officer will not hold election and will declare someone elected.

Tru if there are not more than 2 candidates for two vanancies then no polling is to be held at alland he will be declared elected.  If candidates are threee then polling will be there.

Hi,

I have not given a quiz. Facts stated is probably not understood in the correct perspective. 
1. the society is with membership of 278

2. One casual vacancy in general categoryhas arisen due to resignation.

3. 2 candidates including me has expressed desire to contest only one post. 
4. The Second candidate is pushed by a group of 7 interested members of committee. 
5. MC members are 12 at the moment.

6. I spoke to the election authority on the procedure of election for one post where 2 candidates apply.

7. The election authority has not put up any election notice or no nominations forms are taken. The society secretary just put a notice dt 13/12 notices on notice board (pu on notice board on 14/12) for informing the office the name by willing members .

8. The election officer also informed that he will hold a secret balloting among the MC members.

9. Obviously in MC meeting I will be defeated in election because there will be only max 5 MC member or less with me in view of the other candidate being the person of the group of 7 members. 

10. In such an event this will be a biased election. 
11. what I want to know is whether this sort of election procedure is as per MSC Act. The act and bye law is not detailed when it comes to procedure for election in a casual vacancy. 
12. I therefore feel that an election in a special general meeting would give fair chance for both the candidates when more members will be present to elect.

I hope I am clear . I have given a hypothetical example but a live situation on the matter of election procedure. I very well know that if there are 2 vacancy and 2 candidates then there will be no election. 
 

v. Vaidyanathan.