RAMESHWAR DAYAL UPADHYAY Vs. JOINT REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS have directed this revision against the impugned letter dated 23.6.2000 issued by the Secretary of the Non applicant No. 2 society, thereby the petitioner No. 1 has been intimated that he has ceased to hold the post of director in the non applicant No. 2 society under rule 45(3) of the M.P. Cooperative Societies Rules 1962, for short hereinafter referred to as Rule 62. One more revision petition No. 188/2000 was filed by the petitioners against the same impugned show cause notice dated 26.4.2000 issued by the Secretary of the non applicant No. 2 society. This revision No. 188/2000 shall also be disposed of by a common order to be passed in this revision petition. (232/2000).

(2.) BRIEF facts giving rise to these petitions are that on the basis of intimation dated 16.3.2000 issued by the Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Gwalior to N. A. No. 2, its Secretary issued show cause notice to the petitioner No. 1 that the petitioner No. 1 being a representative of petitioner No. 2 society, was elected as director on the Board of Directors of NA No 2 society. Root Level Society of petitioner No 1 is defaulter for more than one year in respect of over due loan obtained from District Cooperative Central Bank, Bhind under rule 45 (3) of the Rules 62. He was, therefore, required to show cause as to why he should not be treated to be a defaulter under the aforesaid rule. Petitioner No. 1 furnished reply of the show cause notice. After receipt of show cause notice the secretary of NA 2 society had issued impugned letter dated 23.6.2000 thereby intimating the petitioner No. 1 that he has ceased to be a director of NA No. 2 society under Rule 45 (3) ibid. Petitioners had filed revision No 188/2000 challenging the legality of the showcause notice and there after on receipt of impugned Letter dated 23.6.2000 the present Revision Petition No. 232/2000 was filed challenging the legality and propriety of this letter.

(3.) SHOW cause notice in revision No. 188/2000 was assailed mainly on the grounds that the petitioner No. 2 society is not defaulter of Central Cooperative Bank, Bhind. Along with the show cause notice no statement of account was enclosed and sent to the petitioner No 1. Petitioner No 1 is personally not defaulter. If the petitioner No 2 is defaulter of the District Cooperative Central Bank, Bhind that bank alone is competent to take action. Petitioner No. 2-Society has not borrowed any loan from NA No. 2 society and therefore, alleged disqualification is unfounded. It was averred that on receipt of details of account and amount of over due from District Cooperative Central Bank, Bhind, the petitioner No 1 will furnish his further reply.