<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1983 (10) TMI 270 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168868</link>
    <description>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.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Oct 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2015 12:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=380217" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (10) TMI 270 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168868</link>
      <description>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.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Oct 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168868</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>