GHISA Vs. COAL CONSUMERS SAHAKARI BHANDAR LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal under sec. 75 of the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, 1953 against the order of the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Udaipur, dated the 13th July, 1964. The facts are that on the basis of an enquiry held under sec. 46 of the aforesaid Act, the learned Deputy Registrar issued a notice to the appellant to show cause why a total amount of Rs. 15,538,28 should not be recovered from him under the provisions of sec. 57 of the Act. THIS amount is made up of 7 items of different values. The appellant denied the liability in writing but did not appear before the Deputy Registrar for a hearing. The learned Deputy Registrar then proceeded to pass the impugned order which is rather brief. THIS order has been assailed by the learned counsel for the appellant on the ground that it does not bring home to the appellant the various defaults which are alleged to have resulted in the loss of funds to the Society. THIS contention must be upheld. It was the duty of the learned Deputy Registrar while acting under sec. 57 to take up each item of default separately, to weigh all the evidence on it and then give a reasoned finding. THIS has not been done and all that has been stated in the order of the Deputy Registrar is that he is satisfied that the appellant has committed irregularities as well as breach of trust. THIS is much too general to carry conviction. All orders which are subject to appeal or revision or even final orders, must be so framed as to bring out the reasons leading to these orders. Any guilt or default should not be assumed but should be brought home by a process of reasoning which should convince anyone who reads the penal order. THIS principle applies not only to orders of a judicial or quasi-judicial nature but also to executive orders in the public service of which the prime characteristic is accountability.

(2.) IN view of the above, we accept this appeal, set aside the order of the learned Deputy Registrar and remand the case to him with the direction that he should hear the appellant and write out a fresh order in the light of the observations made above.