Orissa high court rules govt policy on cooperative society location can't be questioned
Cuttack: Orissa high court has held that the choice of location for a primary cooperative society (PCS) was a matter of govt policy and could not be questioned unless it violated the Constitution.
The ruling came on Jan 20 while dismissing a PIL seeking a direction to state authorities to construct a permanent PCS office and godown at Kundi village instead of Kuhunda in Cuttack district. The PIL filed by Tushar Ranjan Samal claimed that the PCS, earlier functioning at Kundi, should be permanently re-established there.
The division bench of Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice M S Raman observed, “It is within the domain of the govt after taking report from an expert on the suitability of the place for the purpose of facilitating the agriculturist… and once the govt has taken a policy decision to construct the said primary cooperative society at a place, we do not think that there is any scope for interfering with such policy decision unless it offends the core fabric of the directive principles or the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.”
The bench noted that the society had indeed been operating at Kundi but the building was badly damaged during the 1999 Super Cyclone, forcing the authorities to shift its functioning to a rented premises. Subsequently, the govt decided to construct a permanent PCS at Kuhunda after assessing feasibility.
“Though the govt would make all efforts so that access to such facilities can be availed at the doorstep… we do not think that it is a fit case where the court would exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction,” the bench observed.
The court added that it was within the govt’s wisdom to decide whether to set up another PCS at a nearby location to address local grievances. Since the decision to build the PCS at Kuhunda was taken after de-reservation of ‘gochar’ (grazing) land, the bench concluded, “We do not think that any element of the violation to the provisions of the Constitution is involved.”
Highlighting the role of these societies, the bench said their object is “to facilitate the agriculturist with the quality seeds and the fertilizers and also the technical know-how to enhance the produce/yield and also the recent research having been made in the agricultural field”.
The ruling came on Jan 20 while dismissing a PIL seeking a direction to state authorities to construct a permanent PCS office and godown at Kundi village instead of Kuhunda in Cuttack district. The PIL filed by Tushar Ranjan Samal claimed that the PCS, earlier functioning at Kundi, should be permanently re-established there.
The division bench of Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice M S Raman observed, “It is within the domain of the govt after taking report from an expert on the suitability of the place for the purpose of facilitating the agriculturist… and once the govt has taken a policy decision to construct the said primary cooperative society at a place, we do not think that there is any scope for interfering with such policy decision unless it offends the core fabric of the directive principles or the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.”
The bench noted that the society had indeed been operating at Kundi but the building was badly damaged during the 1999 Super Cyclone, forcing the authorities to shift its functioning to a rented premises. Subsequently, the govt decided to construct a permanent PCS at Kuhunda after assessing feasibility.
“Though the govt would make all efforts so that access to such facilities can be availed at the doorstep… we do not think that it is a fit case where the court would exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction,” the bench observed.
The court added that it was within the govt’s wisdom to decide whether to set up another PCS at a nearby location to address local grievances. Since the decision to build the PCS at Kuhunda was taken after de-reservation of ‘gochar’ (grazing) land, the bench concluded, “We do not think that any element of the violation to the provisions of the Constitution is involved.”
Highlighting the role of these societies, the bench said their object is “to facilitate the agriculturist with the quality seeds and the fertilizers and also the technical know-how to enhance the produce/yield and also the recent research having been made in the agricultural field”.
Next Story