SWARN CHAND Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this petition is to the Punjab Government order dated July 23, 1992 (Annexure P-5) and the order of the Additional Registrar (C) Cooperative Societies dated Aug. 7, 1991 (Annexure P-4). The relevant facts necessary to decide the lis are that at the relevant time the petitioner worked as a Secretary with the Jatpur Cooperative Agricultural Service Society Limited, Tehsil Anandpur Sahib, District Ropar. Respondent No.6-Dilbagh Singh was a salesman of the society. It was the duty of Dilbagh Singh to purchase essential commodities on behalf of the cooperative Bank required for daily use such as sugar, ghee, flour, pulses etc. He had authority to purchase the goods from the market independently and to sell the same onward without any approval. The sale proceeds were required to be deposited with the Secretary of the Bank. However, Dilbagh Singh failed to deposit the sale proceeds either with the Secretary or with the Bank and thus a sum of L 37,388.09 became recoverable from him. The said amount remained due in essential commodities register maintained by him. On Jan. 16, 1986 Dilbagh Singh admitted his liability in writing before the Inspector Cooperative Societies, Dunewal. A copy of the letter of admission has been placed at Annexure P-1. The petitioner has signed the document on even date and has put his signatures on the document on the same day. The translated copy of the admission reads as follows:-

(2.) In order to recover its money, the society raised an arbitration dispute against Dilbagh Singh and the present petitioner including respondents No.7 to 13 who were either ex-President or Vice-President or ex-members of the Committee of the Cooperative Society. The Arbitrator, who was the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, asked the petitioner and Dilbagh Singh to show cause as to what amounts are due from each of owed them to the society. While Dilbagh Singh admitted to a sum of Rs.5600.00. The petitioner owed up to Rs.5820.00 as reimbursable in favour of the society-Bank. An award was passed on Jan. 19, 1987 to the effect that the difference between the admitted value as against L 37,388.09 was the liability of only the petitioner to make good and not the 6th respondent.

(3.) Aggrieved by the award, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Ropar. By the appellate order dated Nov. 10, 1988 the award was set aside. The liability was reversed to read against Dilbagh Singh. The petitioner urged that the society owed money to him which were deposits of sums of money returnable, that is, a sum of Rs.1200.00 and another sum of Rs.2100.00, the latter due towards his salary account and he was prepared to deposit the remaining amount subtracted from the admitted amount. This also the position reflected in the audit report dated June 30, 1985. The other vital fact asserted is that the admitted amount of Rs.5820.00 has nothing to do with the sale proceeds of buying and selling essential commodities for the society. Thus, the liability was fastened on the 6th respondent.