THE DHARIWAL ZAMINDARA CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING CUM PROCESSING SOCIETY LTD. Vs. PUNJAB STATE CO-OPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING FEDERATION LTD. AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this writ petition is to the order dtd. 6/10/2016 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Additional Registrar (Admn.), Cooperative Societies, Punjab, vide which the order dtd. 3/11/2015 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Jalandhar, whereby the appeal preferred by the respondents was dismissed for being beyond the period of limitation prescribed under Sec. 68 of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act, has been set aside.

(2.) It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order dtd. 6/10/2016 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Additional Registrar (Administration), Cooperative Societies, Punjab, cannot sustain in the light of the fact that the authorities did not have the power of condone the delay in filing an appeal which is beyond the period of limitation prescribed in Sec. 68 of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act. He contends that when the Appellate Authority has found that the appeal was beyond the period of limitation, it had no option but to dismiss it because of it being barred by limitation, which has been so done by the Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Jalandhar, vide order dtd. 3/11/2015 (Annexure P-2). The Additional Registrar while passing the order dtd. 6/10/2016 has totally ignored this aspect, although referring to the order passed by this Court in LPA No.755 of 2015 titled as Balbir Singh Jammu Versus Financial Commissioner, Cooperation, Punjab and others decided on 13/7/2015. He, therefore, contends that the impugned order deserves to be set aside.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, asserts that merely because the appeal was beyond the period of limitation, the same could not have been rejected by the Appellate Authority. He further contends that no mention has been made with regard to the merits of the case and the pleas, which have been raised by the respondents before the Appellate Authority. He, however, could not distinguish the judgment which has been passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Balbir Singh Jammu's case (supra).