SUBODH KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short facts leading to this writ petition are that the petitioner was admittedly the Secretary of the Co - operative Society functioning in the name and style of Deep Sakhari Grih Nirman Samithi.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that his room on plot No. 605/47 was locked by the SDO after removing his properties therefrom and making a seizure list. According to the petitioner, he has filed this writ petition for getting that room unlocked and for getting his properties back.

(3.) SECTION 45 -A of the Bihar Cooperative Societies Act empowers the prescribed authority to take police help for taking the possession of the properties and papers from the outgoing Secretary. In this case, the respondent -State says that as the outgoing Secretary was not making over the charge of the office, this provision was resorted to and with the help of the police, the possession was taken and the office was locked. Apparently, if this is the situation, then there is no undue exercise of the authority either by prescribed authority under the Act or by the police who assisted the prescribed authority under this provision. But the real controversy is that whether the office was on plot No. 605/41 or 605/47. This is a disputed question of fact, into which this Court cannot go. Therefore, the SDO, Jamshedpur, is directed to consider the matter afresh within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order as to whether the office of the Society is situated on plot No. 605/41 or on 605/47. If it is situated on plot No. 605/41, the lock is not required to be removed. But if it is found in pursuance of Annexure -1 that the petitioner was allotted plot No. 605/47, over which he has built a room in the individual capacity and not in the capacity of the Secretary of the Society, the lock of that shall be removed.