S SIDDAIAH Vs. REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is an employee in the Postal Department, He is a shareholder of the society called "The Bangalore Postal Employees Consumers' Cooperative Society Ltd. ("the Society") The Society was registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 ("the Act") to cater to the needs of the employees; but unfortunately the Society did not properly function ever since 1972. It is said that the activities of the Society has come to a standstill.

(2.) The petitioner and several other members of the Society repeatedly complained to the Registrar and also to the Government bringing to their notice the illegal activities of the office bearers of the Society and in particular of the Secretary of the Society who is respondent No. 3 herein with a request to hold an enquiry into the affairs of the Society. But no positive action was taken by the concerned officials of the Department.

(3.) I may here briefly refer to the attempts made by the petitioner from time to time although under law ho is not required to do it. He made representations to the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Bangalore-I Circle on 19-7-1976, 3.8.1977, 5.9.1977 and 5-10.1977. In all those representations, the petitioner has complained that the Management has not convened the general body meeting since five years. He has requested the Registrar to fix the responsibility on the - office bearers of the Society for their negligence or dereliction of duty. It is said that upon that complaint the Assistant Registrar called upon the Secretary to appear before him for enquiry with all the relevant records and books of the Society; but the enquiry could not be held as the Secretary did not appear. On 14-12-1977 several members of the Society presented a petition to the Hon'ble Minister for co-operation setting out the commissions and omissions committed by the Committee of Management of the Society with a request to take early action against the office bearers. That representation also appears to have fallen on deaf ears. Finally, the petitioner got issued a lawyer's notice dated the 25th May, 1978 to the Registrar reminding him about the series of representations made earlier by him and calling upon him to take action as per law against the Committee of Management. Even then, no action was taken. The petitioner left with no other alternative, has now moved this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution for an appropriate direction against the Registrar to set the law in motion against the erring office bearers of the Society and to convene its general body meeting.