TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>State Legislature's Authority Confirmed on Co-op Societies' Banking Activities</h1> <h3>Sant Sadhu Singh and ors. Versus State of Punjab and anr.</h3> The Court upheld the validity of the Punjab Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Ordinance, 1969 and subsequent Act, dismissing the petitions challenging ... - Issues:Challenge to the vires of Punjab Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Ordinance, 1969 and Punjab Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Act, 1969 under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.Analysis:The judgment addressed the challenge to the vires of the Punjab Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Ordinance, 1969 and subsequent Act, focusing on Sections 4, 6, 9, and 10. The main grounds of attack included the competence of the Punjab Legislature to legislate on Banking Corporations, alleged colorable exercise of power, and violation of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution. The Court primarily dealt with the first ground of attack, emphasizing that the State Legislature had the authority to legislate on Co-operative Societies, including those engaged in banking, under List II, Entry No. 32 of Schedule VII. The judgment consolidated multiple petitions and clarified that the decision in one petition would apply to all.In one specific case (Civil Writ No. 2820 of 1969), the petitioners were Directors of a Co-operative Bank challenging the curtailment of shareholder rights and increased control by the Registrar due to the Ordinance and Act. The petitioners argued that the State Legislature lacked the power to regulate Co-operative Societies engaged in banking activities. The Court delved into the interpretation of Schedule VII, highlighting List I, Entry Nos. 43, 44, and 45, and List II, Entry No. 32. The arguments revolved around the exclusion of Co-operative Societies from List I, Entry No. 43, and their placement in List II, granting the State Legislature the authority to legislate on such entities.The judgment extensively referenced legal principles and precedents to interpret the legislative competence of the State Legislature concerning Co-operative Societies engaged in banking. It emphasized the distinction between regulating banking business (List I, Entry No. 45) and incorporating and regulating corporations (List I, Entry No. 43), ultimately concluding that the State Legislature had the jurisdiction to regulate Co-operative Societies involved in banking activities. The Court dismissed the petitions, upholding the validity of the Ordinance and Act, with no costs awarded.The judgment was a comprehensive analysis of the constitutional provisions, legal interpretations, and precedents to determine the legislative authority of the State Legislature in regulating Co-operative Societies engaged in banking. It clarified the scope of List I and List II entries, ultimately affirming the validity of the legislative actions challenged in the petitions.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
