AMITANANDA ROY Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner is challenging an order passed by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, West Bengal on the 19th of March, 1973, in exercise of power conferred under Section 89 of the Bengal Co-operative Societies Act 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act).

(2.) This application is by one Amitananda Roy claiming himself to be the share-holder and Secretary of the Writers Buildings Employees' Co-operative Canteen and Stores Limited which is a society registered under the said, Act (hereinafter referred to as the said Society) in respect of which the impugned order of liquidation was passed. The petitioner's case as made out in the petition is as follows: It is stated that the said society was founded in 1964 and since its inception it is functioning as a non-profit making concern. The Managing Committee at the time of making of this application was elected on 30th January, 1973. and it assumed charge on 7th February, 1973. It is stated that since the assumption of the charge by the present Managing Committee, the said Society has been functioning smoothly and without blemish, and trying to reduce the liability of the society. It is alleged that a large number of members of the new Managing Committee belong to different employees' associations affiliated to the State Co-ordination Committee, the functions of which are among others to Co-ordinate the functions of different employees' organisations. The office-bearers of the new Managing Committee also belong to different employees' associations affiliated to the State Co-ordination Committeee. It is alleged that this Co-ordination Committee as well as the different employees' associations are now an eyesore to the Ministers who belong to the Congress and wrongly believe that the Co-ordination Committee and its affiliated organisations are carried on in the interest of the C. P. I. (M). It is alleged that there is another employees' association under the name and style of State Government Employees' Federation, Writers' Buildings Unit (hereinafter referred to as the said Federation) which is a pro-congress organisation and rival to and intensely hostile to State Co-ordination Committee and which has the blessing of the present West Bengal Cabinet and its ministers. It is alleged that one Gour Mohan Sarkar, representing himself to be the Secretary of the said Federation made some false and concocted complaints to Sri Jainal Abedin. Minister-in-charge, Co-operative Department, Government of West Bengal on 27th November, 1972, against the present Managing Committee. It is alleged that the said Gour Mohan Sarkar is not even a share-holder of the said Society for which he has no locus standi to make any complaint against the present Managing Committee. It is alleged that soon after his complaint, there seems to have been some correspondence between the Co-operative Department and the Minister-in-charge. It is alleged that even before giving any inspection report the order for liquidation was virtually issued. In this context certain extracts from notes and orders in the Co-op. Department file are relied on, copies of which are annexed to the petition including a note in the file by the Secretary of the Department concerned after a discussion with the Minister concerned on the 30th of January, 1973. It is stated that what happened thereafter is merely an eyewash. It is stated that on 19th March, 1973, the impugned order under Section 89 of the said Act was passed whereby it was directed that the said society be wound up and in exercise of the power conferred by Section 90 of the said Act, the Inspector-Liquidator of Co-operative Societies No. 1 Calcutta was appointed the Liquidator of the said society. This is the order challenged in this proceeding. Upon the application of the petitioner herein this Rule was issued on 23rd of March, 1973 when an ad-interim order of injunction was also passed.

(3.) Mr. A. P. Chatterji, learned Advocate appearing in support of the Rule made various submissions before me. The first and main submission of Mr. Chatterjee was that the impugned order was made mala fide. Mala fide was alleged against the Federation, the Registrar and the Minister, It was vehemently argued that the order was passed at the instance and dictation of the Minister concerned which would be apparent from the notes in the file referred to above. It was further submitted that the said order was made at the instance of Gour Mohan Sarkar on behalf of the said Federation. Allegation of mala fide against the Registrar was to the effect that the order which was signed by him was actually the order of the Minister and the Secretary; the Registrar merely put his signature on it, that is, he merely acted as a rubber stamp. It was submitted that the Registrar did not. apply his mind but merely carried out the order of the Secretary of the Department and the Minister concerned. In support of his contention that the Registrar did not apply his mind Mr. Chatterjee also submitted that though the decision to make such order was in fact taken on the 30th January, 1973, a further order was passed on the 7th March, 1973, for inspection of the said Society. It was submitted that if the decision taken on the 30th January, 1973, was in fact based on application of mind by the Registrar, then the question of further inspection as directed by the subsequent letter dated 7th March, 1973, could not arise. Accordingly, it was submitted that original decision taken on the 30th January, 1973, did not reflect the independent application of mind on the part of the Registrar. For the aforesaid reasons it was submitted that the order for liquidation of the Society was passed mala fide and should be set aside. It was next submitted that the copy of the Inspection Report was not furnished to the Society and that no opportunity was given to the Society to make representations. Lastly, it was sought to be submitted that the original order passed for inspection of the Society was valid upto 24th Dec. 1972, whereas the report of the Inspector pursuant thereto was made on the 15th January, 1973, which was submitted on the 31st January, 1973. Accordingly, the said Report was made and submitted beyond the authorised period and accordingly the order of liquidation passed on the basis of the same must be held to be invalid. There were some other minor submissions, sought to be made by Mr. Chatterjee which I shall indicate later.