Judgment:
Shivaraj Patil, J.
1. The petitioner has questioned the validity and correctness of the letter dated October 19, 1992, annexure 'E' addressed to the petitioner-bank by the secretary of the first respondent-bank.
2. Sri Jayakumar S. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner-bank has maintained an excellent record. Its recovery of loans was 63.53 per cent. and has credited more than 50 per cent. of the amount so recovered to the first respondent-bank. He further submitted that the petitioner-bank is adjudged as the best bank in performance. He also submitted that the entire amount recovered could not be credited because subsidy and interest difference available was not finalised before April 15, 1992. Be that as it may, we are concerned with the interpretation of section 20(2)(b)(iv) of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (for short 'the Act'), in order to decide whether the petitioner has right to vote at a meeting of the co-operative society.
3. Sri P. Viswanatha Shetty, learned counsel for respondent No. 1, submitted that the language of the aforesaid section is clear that the petitioner has to comply with the two requirements, namely :-
(1) The recovery must have been not less than 50 per cent. and
(2) The entire amount recovered should have been credited to the financing institution.
4. Even if one of the conditions in not satisfied such member shall not be eligible to participate in the election.
5. It is useful to extract relevant portions of section 20(2) of the Act, which read :
'(2) The following shall not have the right to vote at a meeting of the co-operative society in which they are members, namely :- .......
(b) a co-operative society :- ...........
(iv) whose principal object is to advance loans and whose percentage of recovery is less than fifty per cent. of the total demand for the co-operative year immediately preceding the co-operative year during which the meeting is held and which has failed to pass on to the financing bank or credit agency, as the case may be, to which it is indebted, the entire principal amount recovered with interest due thereon, not later than fifteen days of the close of the said co-operative year. . . .'
6. A plain reading of the aforesaid provision makes it clear that the petitioner has not satisfied one of the requirements in order to qualify to participate in the election. The petitioner has no doubt recovered more than 50 per cent. of the loans, but has failed to credit the entire amount recovered by it. Under the circumstances, any other arrangement made for hardship pleaded by learned counsel for the petitioner cannot take away the effect of the said provision. Hence, I hold that both the aforementioned requirements are to be satisfied to get the right to vote at a meeting of the co-operative society.
7. In the result, this writ petition in my opinion has to be rejected at the stage of preliminary hearing. Accordingly, it is rejected.