SUNIL PRAKASH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD .

(2.) THE petitioner 'sCo -operative Society applied for registration in terms of Sec. 5 of the Bihar Self -Supporting Cooperative Societies Act, 1996. His application having been scrutinized, officiating Assistant Registrar, Self -Supporting Co -operative Society, Pupari Sub -Division, District - Samastipur granted the registration. This appears to have brought to the notice of Regisrar Cooperative, Bihar. He got an enquiry conducted. He received report and thereafter by the impugned order, as communicated to the petitioner under memo no. 2466, dated 15.5.2007 (Annexure 6), the registration is declared void ab initio. It is not in dispute that all this was done by the Registrar behind the back of the petitioner without notice to the petitioner. The effect is that the very existence of the petitioner 'sCo -operative has become non est. The registration was granted on 26.2.2003 and it is after four years it is being declared void ab initio ex parte. State seeks to justify the action. The I.A. being I.A. No. 5895/07 has been filed by one Smt. Siya Devi supporting the action of the Registrar and opposing the writ petition. Intervention has been sought on the ground that it is by virtue of her application that action was taken and it is by virtue of registration of the petitioner 'sco -operative society that the intervener is being denied registration. It is thus submitted that she is a necessary party to the writ petition.

(3.) BEFORE proceeding further I propose to dispose of the interlocutory application aforesaid. In my view, the application is not maintainable and is fit to be dismissed as such. Whether a person should be granted registration or not does not concern any other person. The registration is a matter between the registering authority and the person applied. The consequences may be that another person is deprived of certain benefits but those are consequential and remote effect and not direct and immediate.