Mandatory reserved committee seats must be notified and put to election; co-option cannot bypass the statutory scheme.

Section 73B of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 was read as imposing a mandatory reservation of two committee seats, one for Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes and one for the weaker section. Election was treated as the primary method of filling those reserved seats, while appointment or co-option operated only as a fallback where eligible persons were not elected or appointed. Bye-laws and subsidiary rules could not displace this statutory scheme. An election programme that failed to notify the reserved seats or allow eligible members to contest them was inconsistent with the mandatory requirement and rendered the process invalid.

---

---

Issues: Whether, on a proper construction of section 73B of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960, the reserved seats on the committee of a specified society had to be made available for election in the first instance, and whether an election conducted without notifying such reserved seats was invalid.

Analysis: Section 73B created a mandatory reservation of two seats on the committee of a specified society, one for members belonging to the Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes and one for the weaker section. The statutory language and the sequence used in the provision showed that election was the primary mode of filling the reserved seats, while appointment or co-option was only a subsidiary mode if no eligible persons were elected or appointed. The purpose of the provision was to secure genuine representation through a democratic process, and that object would be defeated if co-option were treated as a substitute for election from the outset. Bye-laws and subsidiary rules could not override the statute. Since the election programme did not disclose the reserved seats or give eligible members an opportunity to contest them, the process was contrary to the mandatory requirement of section 73B and was vitiated.

Conclusion: The election was invalid. The High Court's view was set aside and the orders invalidating the election were restored or issued, as the case may be, in favour of the appellants.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute mandates reservation of seats and indicates election as the primary method of filling them, the election authority must notify and conduct the election accordingly; failure to do so vitiates the election, and co-option cannot be used to bypass the statutory requirement.

---