VENKAPPA Vs. REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH respondent No. 2 served, but remained unrepresented. Sri. V. Narasimha Holla, learned Standing Counsel for the State employees' Insurance Corporation is directed to take notice for respondent No. 2.

(2.) THIS Writ Petition is directed against the notice issued by the respondent No. 2 dated 25th October 2006. Fourth respondent is a Co-operative Society registered under the provisions of Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act. It had made certain deposits in the Belgaum D. C. C. Bank Branch at Gokak. Petitioner is the Branch Manager. Second respondent by notice dated 12/13th September 2006, had called upon the petitioner as a branch Manager of the Belgaum District Co-operative Bank, gokak to produce documents specified in the said notice and also directed the petitioner to take notice that in case of failure to comply with the summons issued under Rule 83 of the Income tax Act, 1961 read with Section 45-C to 45-1 of the E. S. l. Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') would entail punitive action being taken against the petitioner under the provisions of Section 32 of CPC. Thereafter on 25. 9. 2006, another notice was issued to the petitioner in his individual capacity interalia informing the petitioner that the fourth respondent is in arrears towards ESI dues to the tune of Rs. 64,726/- and interest at Rs. 22,011/- upto 25. 9. 2006 i. e. , in all Rs. 86,737/- and directed the petitioner to pay the said amount failing which the proceedings would be initiated under Section 45-C to 45-I of the Act including the attachment of his salary.

(3.) PETITIONER after receiving the said notice informed the main Bank i. e. , respondent No. 3. Respondent No. 3 by his communication dated 4. 10. 2006 directed the petitioner to pay the amount to the Insurance Corporation, except the reserve fund deposit of the respondent No. 4. Accordingly, the petitioner by his letter dated 6. 10. 2006 informed the second respondent that under the provisions of Rule 23 sub-rule (3) of the Karnataka co-operative Societies Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'the rules') that the DCC Bank Branch cannot withdraw the amount in reserve fund, unless the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies sanctions permission. Incorporating the said provision, petitioner replied to the notice issued by the second respondent. Thereafter, the second respondent issued another show cause notice dated 12. 10. 2006 interalia summoning the petitioner, as to why further proceedings may not be initiated against the petitioner for realisation of the amount as if it were arrears of ESI Corporation due from the petitioner in the manner provided under Section 45-C to 45-I of the Act, treating the same as having an effect of attachment of debt by the Recovery Officer in exercise of his power under Section 45-C of the Act. The Recovery Officer thereafter issued an order of attachment against the petitioner treating him as a defaulter. It is this order of attachment is called in question by the petitioner.