MATSYODYOG CO OP SOCIETY Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a society, registered under the Cooperative Socities Act. By the petition the petitioner is praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certioraci, for quashing the order dated 10.11.94 passed by the Joint Registrar, Co-operative Society, whereby the order by the Dy. Registrar dated 20. 9, 1994 has set aside (Annexure P.1P). The petitoner furthet prays for quashing of the order dated 25-1-95 passed by the Board of Revenue in Appeal No. A/7-5/C/928/94, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 10.11.94 passed by the Joint Registrar has been rejected (Annexure P. 13).

(2.) Short facts giving rise to this peition are : That the petitioner filed an application before the Dy. Registrar on 18-2-94 (Anx.P.8) seeking relief interalia that 8irld (tank) situated in village Birla. be deleted from the operational area of Resp. No. 3 and it be included in the opertional area of petitioner. The Dy. Registrar by its order dated 20-9-94 acceded to the prayer of the petitioner. Resp. No. 4 aggrieved by the aforesaid order, preferred an appeal before the Joint Registrar, which as stated earlier, was allowed aud the order of the Dy. Registrar was set aside. The appeal preferred by the petitioner against the aforesaid order of the Joint Registrar, as stated earlier, has also been dismissed by the Board of Revenue.

(3.) Shri Amit Agrawal appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the order of the Dy. Registrar dtd. 20-9-94 was after bearing Resp. No. 4.However, without impleading the petitioner, Resp. No. 4 preferrad the appeal and the Joint Registrar passed the impugned order without hearing the petitioner. It is further urged that non-impleading the petitioner as party, before the Joint Registrar, goes to the root of the matter and on this ground alone the order of the Joint Registrar needs to be set aside. It is farther submitted that such a point was raised before the Board of Revenue in second appeal. But the same was not taken note of and on this ground alone the order of Board of Revenu suffers from illegality and deserves to be quashed by this Court.