By IC Naik
“PILs against the amendments are pending before the Bombay HC,” Maharashtra state cooperation minister Harshwardhan Patil told TOI recently. “The Gujarat HC has questioned the 97th constitutional amendment (under which the cooperative society amendments have been drawn up). A joint committee of both houses of Maharashtra legislature is discussing it and should suggest changes.
Taking this into account, we will “go slow” on strict enforcement of the MCS Act amendments,” Patil said.
Giving a detailed account of how confusing this legislation viz Maharashtra Ordinance 2 of 2013, was, (it has lapsed any way on 22 April 2013 and is no longer implementable) the above statement of the highest authority in power over cooperative affairs of the State has been nothing but ridiculed thereby.
The Honourable High Court of Gujarat has not just “questioned” the 97th Constitutional (Amendment) Act 2011, but quashed its vital element the part IXB of the Constitution inserted thereby, as unconstitutional. But that cannot become unconstitutional for any other State. No other High Court may agree with that view.
The Constitutional obligation of this frontline State does not alter that, in terms of the fact that “Co-operative Societies” is now a fundamental opportunity (Social and Economical ) provided for every citizen. New Article 43B which has set for States a directive to act in consonance with the New Fundamental Right of (i) voluntarily formed, (ii) for autonomous functioning, (iii) democratically controlled and professionally managed co-operative Societies is very much there.
The State was constitutionally obliged to take specific drastic steps through amendment in State Act in terms of Part IXB referred to above, to set free the Co-operative Sector from its own interference [Referred to as unnecessary outside interference in the statement of objects and reasons for the Constitution (111th Amendment) bill 2009 piloted by Shri Sharad Pawar).
What exactly he meant, if it was true, when the Honourable Minister said “we will go slow on strict enforcement of the MCS Act amendments” Ironically the effect of this statement has been described in these words “ Members of housing societies across Maharashtra can heave a sigh of relief as the state government has decided, for now, not to insist on strict implementation of the controversial and confusing amendments to the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies (MCS) Act, 1960, which the societies have been directed to adopt by May 30.”
Uniform Amendments to State Laws were directed by unanimous resolutions of both the houses of Parliament, where all States were represented and despite that every State waited for the entire 12 months earmarked, by the Parliament as a preparatory time. This period having expired on 14the February 2013 the inconsistent provisions of the State Acts have been superseded by those made through Part IXB of the Constitution.
Did the Minister mean that the State will “go slow” in implementing Constitutional provisions?
Has our constitution become so liberal that a Minister of one of the States can take a decision as regards the speed of implementation of the constitutional provisions?
The Amendments in the M. C. S. Act 1960 made under the Maharashtra Ordinance 2 of 2013, do not exist anymore.
The provisions of Part IXB prevail over all States laws (except in the State of Gujarat) and these are to be implemented with the speed defined therein. It cannot be slowed down unless President promulgates an ordinance to extend the time or the Supreme Court accepts the view of the High Court of Gujarat.
Ironically the intention of 97th C A A was for the betterment of cooperative sector so how does “the go slow” in implementation of provisions for betterment gives relief!
