Domar Singh Verma v. The Deputy Registrar

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 4366 of 2018 Domar Singh Verma S/o Shri Shriram Verma, Aged About 60 Years, Society Manager (Suspended), Krishak Sewa Sahakari Samity Maryadit, Ghumka, Registration No. 1145, District Rajnandgaon, R/o Village Ghumka, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. The Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Society, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh

2. The Joint Registrar, Cooperative Society, Durg Division, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

3. The Managing Director, Krishak Sewa Sahakari Samity Maryadit, Ghumka, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents WPS No. 4378 of 2018 Brijlal Choudhary S/o Shri Chamruram Choudhary, Aged About 52 Years, Managing Director (Suspended), Krishak Sewa Sahakari Samity Maryadit, Ghumka, Registration No. 1145, District Rajnandgaon, R/o Village Ghumka, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. The Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Society, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh

2. The Joint Registrar, Cooperative Society, Durg Division, DistrictDurg, Chhattisgarh

3. The Managing Director, Krishak Sewa Sahakari Samity Maryadit, Ghumka, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents

For Petitioner :

Mr. Prakash Tiwari, Advocate.

For State :

Mr. Rahul Mishra, Dy. Govt. Advocate For Respondent No.3 :

Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 11.04.2019

1. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order Annexure P-1 dated 11.06.2018.

2. At the outset, this Court finds that the said impugned order is one which has been passed by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Society, Rajnandgaon in a proceeding drawn under Section 55(2) of the Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (for short 'the Act of 1960')

3. This Court, at this juncture, is not inclined to entertain the writ petitions for the simple reason that the order passed by the Deputy Registrar under challenge is one which is an appealable order under Section 77 of the Act of 1960.

4. In view of the fact that there is a statutory alternative remedy available to the petitioners i.e. an appeal under Section 77 of the Act of 1960, this Court in exercise of its judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India finds it difficult to test the veracity of the order under challenge in the present writ petitions.

5. Accordingly, reserving the right of the petitioners to challenge the impugned order by way of an appeal under Section 77 of the Act of 1960, both the writ petitions stand disposed of.

6. Considering the fact that the petitioners have challenged the impugned order before this Court immediately after the impugned order was passed, in the event the petitioners prefer an appeal before the appellate authority within a period of 30 days from today, the appellate authority shall entertain the appeal and decide the same ignoring the aspect of limitation, on its own merit in accordance with the rules and regulations and the procedure prescribed under the Act. Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Khatai