SHANKAR PRASAD YADAV Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition is taken up today through Video conferencing. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dtd. 25/10/2016 passed by the respondent no. 2 - the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Jharkhand, Ranchi in Misc. Case No. 22 of 2015. The petitioners have also prayed for quashing notices as contained in letters nos. 161 and 162 dtd. 13/3/2015 issued by the respondent no. 5 - Chairman of Gidhini PACS. Further prayer has been made for quashing the notices as contained in letter nos. 165 and 166 dtd. 6/4/2015 issued by the respondent no. 5. The petitioners have further prayed for quashing the enquiry report as contained in letter no. 182 dtd. 30/3/2016 submitted by the respondent no. 4 - the District Co-operative Officer, Deoghar to the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies (Fund), Jharkhand, Ranchi.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent no. 5 issued the impugned notices as contained in letter nos. 161 and 162 dtd. 13/3/2015 to the petitioners purportedly under Clause 12(a) and 12(c) of the Bye-laws of the Primary Agricultural Credit Societies (PACS), Gidhini without complain from any corner against them. It is further submitted that before issuance of impugned notices dtd. 13/3/2015 to the petitioners, no enquiry whatsoever was conducted by the respondent no. 5. Nevertheless, subsequent to issuance of the said notices, the petitioners submitted their respective replies to the respondent no. 5 through speed post on 17/4/2015 denying the allegations made in the said letters. However, most arbitrarily, the respondent no. 5, vide letter nos. 176 and 177 dtd. 17/6/2015 returned the petitioners' share capital in the said PACS. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that vide impugned notices as contained in letter nos. 165 and 166 dtd. 6/4/2015, the petitioners have been removed from the membership of the PACS, Gidhini only due to enmity with some of the members of the said PACS that too, concerning the earlier election of the managing committee. Though the petitioners challenged the letter nos. 161 and 162 dtd. 13/3/2015 as well as letter nos. 165 and 166 dtd. 6/4/2015 before the respondent no. 2 which was registered as Misc. Case No. 22 of 2015, however, the said case was dismissed by the respondent no. 2 vide order dtd. 25/10/2016 primarily relying on the enquiry report dtd. 30/3/2016 submitted by the respondent no. 4. The said order of the respondent no. 2 itself indicates that there has been no independent application of mind by the respondent no. 2, rather the same has passed in a mechanical manner without appreciating the grounds taken by the petitioners in their respective reply.

(3.) Mr. Mihir Kunal Ekka, AC to SC-III appearing on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 to 4 and Mr. Mrinal Kanti Roy, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 5 and 6, jointly submit that the petitioners' membership from the Gidhini PACS has been cancelled due to the reason that they have been found indulged in such activities which were detrimental to the interest of the said PACS. It is further submitted that the respondent no. 2 while passing the order dtd. 25/10/2016 has duly considered the fact that the petitioners were provided adequate opportunity of hearing before removing them from the membership of the said PACS and hence, the said order does not require any interference of this Court.